Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Section 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes ý No o

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act Yes o No ý

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant; (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports; and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the
past 90 days. Yes ý No o

Indicate by checkmark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be
submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to submit and post such files). Yes ý No o

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained,
to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See
definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer" and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer ý

Accelerated filer o

Non-accelerated filer o

Smaller reporting company o

Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Act. Yes o No ý

The aggregate market value of the outstanding Common Stock held by nonaffiliates as of June 30, 2015 was approximately $1.33 billion.

As
of February 24, 2016, the number of outstanding shares of the Common Stock, $0.01 par value, of Eagle Bancorp, Inc. was 33,551,237.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the Company's definitive Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held on May 12, 2016 are incorporated by reference in
Part III hereof.

In this report, unless otherwise expressly stated or the context otherwise requires, the terms "we," "us," the "Company," "Eagle," and
"our" refer to Eagle Bancorp, Inc. and our subsidiaries on a combined basis, except in the description of any of our securities, in which case these terms refer solely to Eagle
Bancorp, Inc. and not to any of our subsidiaries. References to "EagleBank" or "Bank" refer to EagleBank, which is our principal subsidiary.

Eagle
Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company"), headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, was incorporated under the laws of the State of Maryland on October 28, 1997, to serve as the bank
holding company for EagleBank (the "Bank"). The Company was formed by a group of local businessmen and professionals with significant prior experience in community banking in the Company's market
area, together with an experienced community bank senior management team. The Company has one direct non-banking subsidiary, Eagle Commercial Ventures, LLC ("ECV"), which provides subordinated
financing for the acquisition, development and construction of real estate projects.

The
Bank, a Maryland chartered commercial bank, which is a member of the Federal Reserve System, is the Company's principal operating subsidiary. It commenced banking operations on
July 20, 1998. The Bank operates twenty one banking offices: seven in Montgomery County, Maryland; five located in the District of Columbia; and nine in Northern Virginia. Refer to Properties
on page 32 for a listing of banking offices. The Bank may seek additional banking offices consistent with its strategic plan, although there can be no assurance that the Bank will establish any
additional offices, or that any branch office will prove to be profitable.

The
Bank has two active direct subsidiaries: Bethesda Leasing, LLC and Eagle Insurance Services, LLC. Bethesda Leasing, LLC holds title to and operates real estate
owned and acquired through foreclosure. Eagle Insurance Services, LLC facilitates the placement of commercial and retail insurance products through a referral arrangement with The Meltzer
Group, a large well known insurance brokerage within the Company's market area.

The
Bank operates as a community bank alternative to the super-regional financial institutions, which dominate its primary market area. The cornerstone of the Bank's philosophy is to
provide superior, personalized service to its clients. The Bank focuses on relationship banking, providing each client with a number of services, familiarizing itself with, and addressing itself to,
client needs in a proactive, personalized fashion. Management believes that the Bank's target market segments, small and medium-sized for profit and non-profit businesses and the consumer base working
or living in and near the Bank's market area, demand the convenience and personal service that an independent locally based financial institution such as the Bank can offer. It is these themes of
convenience and proactive personal service that form the basis for the Bank's business development strategies.

The
acquisition of Virginia Heritage Bank ("Virginia Heritage") completed on October 31, 2014, added approximately $800 million in loans, $3 million in loans held
for sale, $645 million in deposits, and $95 million in borrowings. Identified intangibles related to core deposits were recorded for $4.6 million, which is being amortized over
its estimated useful life through 2020 and an initial intangible for goodwill was recorded for approximately $102.3 million. Additionally, in connection with the transaction, the Company
recorded a fair value credit mark on the loan portfolio for approximately $12.5 million. The income and expenses of Virginia Heritage are included in the consolidated results of operations for
the year ended December 31, 2014, starting with the two month period subsequent to the acquisition.

Description of Services. The Bank offers a full range of commercial banking services to its business and professional clients, as well
as complete
consumer banking services to individuals living or working in the service area. The Bank emphasizes providing commercial banking services to sole proprietorships, small and medium-sized businesses,
partnerships, corporations, non-profit organizations and associations,

and
investors living and working in and near the Bank's primary service area. A full range of retail banking services are offered to accommodate the individual needs of both corporate customers as
well as the community the Bank serves. The Bank also offers online banking, mobile banking and a remote deposit service, which allows clients to facilitate and expedite deposit transactions through
the use of electronic devices.

The
Bank provides a variety of commercial and consumer lending products to small, medium and large-sized businesses and to individuals for various business and personal purposes,
including (i) commercial loans for a variety of business purposes such as for working capital, equipment purchases, real estate lines of credit, and government contract financing;
(ii) asset based lending and accounts receivable financing (on a limited basis); (iii) construction and commercial real estate loans; (iv) business equipment financing;
(v) consumer home equity lines of credit, personal lines of credit and term loans; (vi) consumer installment loans such as auto and personal loans; (vii) personal credit cards
offered through an outside vendor; and (viii) residential mortgage loans.

The
Bank maintains a loan portfolio consisting primarily of traditional business and real estate secured loans, with a substantial portion having variable and adjustable rates, and where
the cash flow of the borrower/borrower's business is the principal source of debt service with a secondary emphasis on collateral. Real estate loans are made generally for commercial purposes and are
structured using both variable and fixed rates and renegotiable rates which adjust in three to five years, with maturities of five to ten years.

The
Bank's consumer loans portfolio is comprised generally of two loan types: (i) home equity lines of credit that are structured with an interest only draw period followed either
by a balloon maturity or a fully amortized repayment schedule; and (ii) first lien residential mortgage loans, although the Bank's general practice is to sell conforming first trust loans on a
servicing released basis to third party investors.

The
Bank has also developed significant expertise and commitment as a Small Business Administration ("SBA") lender and has been recognized as a top originator of such loans in our market
area.

The
Bank is an approved SBA lender. As a preferred lender under the SBA's Preferred Lender Program, the Bank can originate certain SBA loans in-house without prior SBA approval. SBA
loans are made through programs designed by the federal government to assist the small business community in obtaining financing from financial institutions that are given government guarantees as an
incentive to make the loans. Under certain circumstances, the Bank attempts to further mitigate commercial term loan losses by using loan guarantee programs offered by the SBA. SBA lending is subject
to federal legislation that can affect the availability and funding of the program. From time to time, this dependence on legislative funding causes limitations and uncertainties with regard to the
continued funding of such programs, which could potentially have an adverse financial impact on our business.

The
direct lending activities in which the Bank engages carry the risk that the borrowers will be unable to perform on their obligations. As such, interest rate policies of the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the "Federal Reserve Board" or the "Federal Reserve") and general economic conditions, nationally and in the Bank's primary market area, could have a
significant impact on the Bank's and the Company's results of operations. To the extent that economic conditions deteriorate, business and individual borrowers may be less able to meet their
obligations to the Bank in full, in a timely manner, resulting in decreased earnings or losses to the Bank. To the extent the Bank makes fixed rate loans or variable rate loans with fixed rate floors,
general increases in interest rates will tend to reduce the Bank's spread as the interest rates the Bank must pay for deposits may increase while interest income may be unchanged. Economic conditions
may also adversely affect the value of property pledged as security for loans.

The
Bank's goal is to mitigate risks in the event of unforeseen threats to the loan portfolio as a result of economic downturn or other negative influences. Plans for mitigating inherent
risks in managing loan assets include: carefully enforcing loan policies and procedures, evaluating each borrower's business plan during the underwriting process and throughout the loan term,
identifying and monitoring primary and alternative sources for loan repayment, and obtaining collateral to mitigate economic loss in the event of liquidation. Specific loan reserves are established
based upon credit and/or collateral
risks on an individual loan basis. A risk rating system is employed to proactively estimate loss exposure and provide a measuring system for setting general and specific reserve allocations.

The
composition of the Bank's loan portfolio is heavily weighted toward commercial real estate, both owner occupied and income producing real estate. At December 31, 2015, owner
occupied commercial real estate and owner occupied commercial real estate construction represent 12% of the loan portfolio. At December 31, 2015, non-owner occupied commercial real estate and
real estate construction represented approximately 62% of the loan portfolio. The combined owner occupied and commercial real estate loans represent 74% of the loan portfolio. These loans are
underwritten to mitigate lending risks typical of this type of loan such as declines in real estate values, changes in borrower cash flow and general economic conditions. The Bank typically requires a
maximum loan to value of 80% and minimum cash flow debt service coverage of 1.15 to 1.0. Personal guarantees are generally required, but may be limited. In making real estate commercial mortgage
loans, the Bank generally requires that interest rates adjust not less frequently than five years.

The
Bank is also an active traditional commercial lender providing loans for a variety of purposes, including cash flow, equipment, and account receivable financing. This loan category
represents approximately 21% of the Bank's loan portfolio at December 31, 2015 and is generally variable or adjustable rate. Commercial loans meet reasonable underwriting standards, including
appropriate collateral, and cash flow necessary to support debt service. Personal guarantees are generally required, but may be limited. SBA loans represent approximately 1% of commercial loans. In
originating SBA loans, the Bank assumes the risk of non-payment on the uninsured portion of the credit. The Bank generally sells the insured portion of the loan generating noninterest income from the
gains on sale, as well as servicing income on the portion participated. SBA loans are subject to the same cash flow analyses as other commercial loans. SBA loans are subject to a maximum loan size
established by the SBA.

Approximately
2% of the loan portfolio at December 31, 2015 consists of home equity loans and lines of credit and other consumer loans. These credits, while making up a smaller
portion of the loan portfolio, demand the same emphasis on underwriting and credit evaluation as other types of loans advanced by the Bank.

Approximately
3% of the total loan portfolio consists of residential home mortgage loans. These credits represent first liens on residential property loans originated by the Bank. While
the Bank's general practice is to originate and sell (servicing released) loans made by its Residential Lending department, from time to time certain loan characteristics do not meet the requirements
of third party investors and these loans are instead maintained in the Bank's portfolio until they are resold to another investor at a later date.

Our
lending activities are subject to a variety of lending limits imposed by state and federal law. These limits will increase or decrease in response to increases or decreases in the
Bank's level of capital. At January 31, 2016, the Bank had a legal lending limit of $116 million. For the year ended December 31, 2015, the average Commercial Real Estate (CRE)
and Commercial and Industrial (C&I) loan balance was $2.2 million and $687 thousand, respectively. In accordance with internal lending policies, the Bank
occasionally sells participations in its loans to other area banks, which allows the Bank to manage risk involved in these loans and to meet the lending needs of its clients.

From
time to time the Company may make loans for its own portfolio or through its higher risk loan affiliate, ECV, which under its operating agreement conducts lending only to real
estate projects. Such

loans
may have higher risk characteristics than loans made by the Bank, such as lower priority security interests and/or higher loan to value ratios. The Company seeks an overall financial return on
these transactions commensurate with the risks and structure of each individual loan. Certain transactions bear current interest at a rate with a significant premium to normal market rates. Other loan
transactions carry a standard rate of current interest, but also earn additional interest based on a fixed rate or a percentage of the profits of the underlying project. Refer to the discussion under
the caption "Noninterest Income" at page 49 and "Loan Portfolio" at page 53, for further information on the Company's and ECV's higher risk lending activities. At December 31,
2015, ECV had four outstanding loan transactions totaling $9.2 million.

The
risk of nonpayment (or deferred payment) of loans is inherent in commercial banking. The Bank's marketing focus on small to medium-sized businesses may result in the assumption by
the Bank of certain lending risks that are different from those attendant to loans to larger companies. Management and/or committees of the Bank carefully evaluate loan applications and attempt to
minimize credit risk exposure by use of extensive loan application data, due diligence, and approval and monitoring procedures; however, there can be no assurance that such procedures can
significantly reduce such lending risks.

The
Bank originates residential mortgage loans primarily as a correspondent lender. Activity in the residential mortgage loan market is highly sensitive to changes in interest rates and
product availability. While the Bank does have delegated underwriting authority from most of its investors, it also employs the services of the investor to underwrite the loans. Because the loans are
originated within investor guidelines and designated automated underwriting and product specific requirements as part of the loan application, the loans sold have a limited recourse provision. Most
contracts with investors contain recourse periods. In general, the Bank may be required to repurchase a previously sold mortgage loan or indemnify the investor if there is non-compliance with defined
loan origination or documentation standards, including fraud, negligence or material misstatement in the loan documents. In addition, the Bank may have an obligation to repurchase a loan if the
mortgagor has defaulted early in the loan term. The potential default repurchase period varies by investor but can be up to approximately twelve months after sale of the loan to the investor.
Mortgages subject to recourse are collateralized by single-family residential properties, have loan-to-value ratios of 80% or less, or have private mortgage insurance. In certain instances, the Bank
may provide equity loans (second position financing) in combination with residential first mortgage lending for purchase money and refinancing purposes.

The
Bank enters into commitments to originate residential mortgage loans whereby the interest rate on the loan is determined prior to funding (i.e. rate lock commitments). Such
rate lock commitments on mortgage loans to be sold in the secondary market are considered to be derivatives. To protect against the price risk inherent in residential mortgage loan commitments, the
Bank utilizes both "best efforts" and "mandatory delivery" forward loan sale commitments to mitigate the risk of potential decrease in the values of loans that would result from the exercise of the
derivative loan commitments. Under a "best efforts" contract, the Bank commits to deliver an individual mortgage loan of a specified principal amount and quality to an investor and the investor
commits to a price that it will purchase the loan from the Bank if the loan to the underlying borrower closes. The Bank protects itself from changes in interest rates through the use of best efforts
forward delivery commitments, whereby the investor commits to purchase a loan at a price representing a premium on the day the borrower commits to an interest rate with the intent that the
buyer/investor has assumed the interest rate risk on the loan. As a result, the Bank is not generally exposed to losses on loans sold utilizing best efforts, nor will it realize gains related to rate
lock commitments due to changes in interest rates. The market values of rate lock commitments and best efforts contracts are not readily ascertainable with precision because rate lock commitments and
best efforts contracts are not actively traded. Because of the high correlation between rate lock commitments and best efforts contracts, no gain or loss should occur on the rate lock commitments.
Under a "mandatory delivery" contract, the Bank commits to deliver a certain principal amount of mortgage loans to an investor at a specified price on or before a specified date. If the Bank fails to
deliver the amount of mortgages

necessary
to fulfill the commitment by the specified date, it is obligated to pay the investor a "pair-off" fee, based on then-current market prices, to compensate the investor for the shortfall. The
rate lock commitments on mortgage loans to be sold in the secondary market are considered to be derivatives. The Bank manages the interest rate risk on rate lock commitments by entering into forward
sale contracts of mortgage backed securities, whereby the Bank obtains the right to deliver securities to investors in the future at a specified price. Such contracts are accounted for as derivatives
and are recorded at fair value in derivative assets or liabilities, with changes in fair value recorded in other income. The period of time between issuance of a loan commitment to the customer and
closing and sale of the loan to an investor generally ranges from 30 to 90 days under current market conditions.

The
general terms and underwriting standards for each type of commercial real estate and construction loan are incorporated into the Bank's lending policies. These policies are analyzed
periodically by management, and the policies are reviewed and approved by the Board. The Bank's loan policies and practices described in this report are subject to periodic change, and each guideline
or standard is subject to waiver or exception in the case of any particular loan, by the appropriate officer or committee, in accordance with the Bank's loan policies. Policy standards are often
stated in mandatory terms, such as "shall" or "must", but these provisions are subject to exceptions. Policy requires that loan value not exceed a percentage of "market value" or "fair value" based
upon appraisals or evaluations obtained in the ordinary course of the Bank's underwriting practices.

Loans
are secured primarily by duly recorded first deeds of trust. In some cases, the Bank may accept a recorded junior trust position. In general, borrowers will have a proven ability
to build, lease, manage and/or sell a commercial or residential project and demonstrate satisfactory financial condition. Additionally, an equity contribution toward the project is required.

Construction
loans require that the financial condition and experience of the general contractor and major subcontractors be satisfactory to the Bank. Guaranteed, fixed price
construction contracts are required whenever appropriate, along with payment and performance bonds or completion bonds for certain larger scale projects.

Loans
intended for residential land acquisition, lot development and construction are made on the premise that the land: (1) is or will be developed for building sites for
residential structures; and (2) will ultimately be utilized for construction or improvement of residential zoned real properties, including the creation of housing. Residential development and
construction loans will finance projects such as single family subdivisions, planned unit developments, townhouses, and condominiums. Residential land acquisition, development and construction loans
generally are underwritten with a maximum term of 36 months, including extensions approved at origination.

Commercial
land acquisition and construction loans are secured by real property where loan funds will be used to acquire land and to construct or improve appropriately zoned real
property for the creation of income producing or owner user commercial properties. Borrowers are required to contribute equity into each project at levels determined by the appropriate Loan Committee.
Commercial land acquisition and construction loans generally are underwritten with a maximum term of 24 months.

Loan-to-value
("LTV") ratios, with few exceptions, are maintained consistent with or below supervisory guidelines.

Construction
draw requests generally must be presented in writing on American Institute of Architects documents and certified by the contractor, the borrower and the borrower's
architect. Each draw request shall also include the borrower's soft cost breakdown certified by the borrower or its Chief Financial Officer. Prior to an advance, the Bank or its contractor inspects
the project to determine that the work has been completed, to justify the draw requisition.

Commercial
permanent loans are secured by improved real property, which is generating income in the normal course of operation. Debt service coverage, assuming stabilized occupancy, must
be satisfactory

to
support a permanent loan. The debt service coverage ratio is ordinarily at least 1.15 to 1. As part of the underwriting process, debt service coverage ratios are stress tested assuming a 200 basis
point increase in interest rates from their current levels.

Commercial
permanent loans are generally subject to re-pricing after 5 years and are underwritten with a term not greater than 10 years or the remaining useful life of the
property, whichever is lower. The amortization term of such loans is generally a maximum of 25 years.

Personal
guarantees are generally received from the principals on commercial real estate loans, and only in instances where the loan-to-value is sufficiently low and the debt service is
sufficiently high is consideration given to either limiting or not requiring personal recourse.

The
Company's loan portfolio includes loans made for real estate Acquisition, Development and Construction ("ADC") purposes, including both income producing and owner occupied projects.
ADC loans amounted to $1.07 billion at December 31, 2015. The ADC loans containing loan funded interest reserves represent approximately 49% (by dollars) of the outstanding ADC loan
portfolio at December 31, 2015. The decision to establish a loan funded interest reserve is made upon origination of the ADC loan and is based upon a number of factors considered during
underwriting of the credit including: (i) the feasibility of the project; (ii) the experience of the sponsor; (iii) the creditworthiness of the borrower and guarantors;
(iv) borrower equity contribution; and (v) the level of collateral protection. When appropriate, an interest reserve provides an effective means of addressing the cash flow
characteristics of a properly underwritten ADC loan. The Company does not significantly utilize interest reserves in other loan products. The Company recognizes that one of the risks inherent in the
use of interest reserves is the potential masking of underlying problems with the project and/or the borrower's ability to repay the loan. In order to mitigate this inherent risk, the Company employs
a series of reporting and monitoring mechanisms on all ADC loans, whether or not an interest reserve is provided, including: (i) construction and development timelines which are monitored on an
ongoing basis which track the progress of a given project to the timeline projected at origination; (ii) a construction loan administration department independent of the lending function;
(iii) third party independent construction loan inspection reports; (iv) monthly interest reserve monitoring reports detailing the balance of the interest reserves approved at
origination and the days of interest carry represented by the reserve balances as compared to the then current anticipated time to completion and/or sale of speculative projects; and
(v) quarterly commercial real estate construction meetings among senior Company management which includes monitoring of current and projected real estate market conditions. If a project has not
performed as expected, it is not the customary practice of the Company to increase loan funded interest reserves.

Despite
the less than robust economic recovery, the Company has not experienced any significant issues with increased vacancy rates or lower rents for income producing properties
financed. The construction loan portfolio has remained solid, particularly in areas of well-located residential and multifamily projects, as the housing market has continued to improve and stabilize.
The Washington, D.C. metropolitan area real estate market has been relatively stable; however, certain segments, including suburban offices, have exhibited higher than normal vacancy and experienced
concessions in specific submarkets. The impact of disruptions in government spending patterns, (i.e. sequestration, program cuts or terminations, leasing activity, and changes in geographic
distribution of government spending) while within manageable levels to date, remains of concern. As a result, the Company has maintained somewhat higher than pre-recession environmental allocation
factors for the allowance for loan and lease losses ("ALLL") for the real estate loan portfolio. As part of its overall risk assessments, management carefully reviews the Bank's loan
portfolio and general economic and market conditions on a regular basis and will continue to adjust both the specific and environmental reserve factors as necessary.

Deposit
services include business and personal checking accounts, NOW accounts, tiered savings and money market account and time deposits with varying maturity structures and customer
options. A complete individual retirement account program is available. The Bank also participates in the Promontory Interfinancial Network, LLC ("Promontory") Certificate of Deposit Account
Registry Service ("CDARS") and its Insured Cash Sweep ("ICS") program, both of which networks function to assure full FDIC insurance for participating Bank customers. In cooperation with Goldman Sachs
Asset Management, the Bank offers a Goldman Sachs Investment Sweep Account, a check writing cash management account that sweeps funds to one of several non-FDIC insured off-balance sheet investment
accounts managed by Goldman Sachs.

The
Bank offers a full range of on-line banking services for both personal and business accounts and has a Mobile Banking application for both businesses and individuals. Other services
include cash management services, business sweep accounts, lock box, remote deposit capture, account reconciliation services, merchant card services, safety deposit boxes and Automated Clearing House
origination. After-hours depositories and ATM service are also available.

The
Bank and Company maintain portfolios of short term investments and investment securities consisting primarily of U.S. agency bonds and government sponsored enterprise mortgage backed
securities, municipal bonds, and corporate bonds. The Bank also owns equity investments related to membership in the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta ("FHLB"). The
Bank's securities portfolio also consists of equity investments in the form of common stock of two local banking companies. These portfolios provide the following objectives: liquidity management,
additional income to the Company and Bank in the form of interest and gain on sale opportunities, collateral to facilitate borrowing arrangements and assistance with meeting interest rate risk
management objectives. The current Investment Policy limits the Bank to investments of high quality,
U.S. Treasury securities, U.S. agency securities and high grade municipal and corporate securities. High risk investments and non-traditional investments are prohibited. Investment maturities are
generally limited to ten to fifteen years, except as specifically approved by the Asset Liability Committee ("ALCO"), and mortgage backed pass through securities with average lives generally not to
exceed eight years.

The
Company and Bank have formalized an asset and liability management process and have a standing ALCO consisting both of outside and inside directors and senior management. The ALCO
operates under established policies and practices, which are updated and re-approved annually. A typical ALCO meeting includes discussion of current economic conditions and strategies, including
interest rate trends and, the current balance sheet and earnings position, comparisons to budget, cash flow estimates, liquidity positions and funding alternatives as necessary, interest rate risk
position (quarterly), capital positions of the Company and Bank, reviews (including independent reviews) of the investment portfolio of the Bank and the Company, and the approval of investment
transactions. Additionally, monthly ALCO meetings may include reports and analysis of outside firms to enhance the Committee's knowledge and understanding of various financial matters.

The
development of the Company's customer base has benefited from the extensive business and personal contacts of its directors and executive officers. The Bank has placed enhanced
reliance on proactively designed officer calling programs, active participation in business organizations, and enhanced referral programs.

Internet Access to Company Documents. The Company provides access to its Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") filings through its
web site at
www.eaglebankcorp.com. After accessing the web site, the filings are available upon selecting "Investor Relations/SEC Filings/Documents." Reports available include the annual report on
Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after the reports are electronically
filed with or furnished to the SEC.

The primary service area of the Bank is the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area. With a population of nearly 6,600,000, the region is the
5th largest market in the U.S. Total employment in the region is approximately 2,600,000. The region has one of the highest total job creation records of any market in the country
with reported new job creation of more than 355,800 jobs since 2005 and 68,500 new jobs created in 2015. The Washington, D.C. metropolitan area contains a substantial federal workforce, as well as
supporting a variety of support industries such as attorneys, lobbyists, government contractors, real estate developers and investors, non-profit organizations, tourism and consultants. The Gross
Regional Product ("GRP") for the metropolitan area in 2014 was reported at $449 billion. Of this amount, approximately $104 billion or 30% is associated with spending by the government.
Other significant sectors include professional and business services, education, health, leisure and hospitality. The region also has a very active non-profit sector including trade associations,
colleges, universities and major hospitals.

Montgomery
County, Maryland, with a total population estimated at 1,030,447 as of July 2014 and occupying an area of about 500 square miles, borders Washington, D.C. to the north and is
roughly 30 miles southwest of Baltimore. Montgomery County represents a diverse and healthy segment of Maryland's economy. Montgomery County is a thriving business center and is Maryland's most
populous jurisdiction. Population in the county is expected to grow 4.9% between 2015 and 2020. While the state of Maryland boasts a demographic profile superior to the U.S. economy at large, the
economy in and around Montgomery County is among the best in Maryland. The number of jobs in Montgomery County has been relatively stable in the recent past with the public sector contributing about
20% of the employment. The unemployment rate in Montgomery County is among the lowest in the state at 3.9% as of November 2015. A highly educated population has contributed to favorable median
household income of $98,704 with the number of households totaling 362,608. According to the U.S. census update, approximately 57% of the County's residents in 2014 hold college or advanced degrees,
placing the population of Montgomery County among the most educated in the nation. The area boasts a diverse business climate of over 26,000 businesses with 460,000 private sector jobs in addition to
a strong federal government presence. Major areas of employment include a substantial technology sector, biotechnology, software development, a housing construction and renovation sector, and legal,
financial services, health care, and professional services sectors. Major private employers include Adventist Healthcare, Lockheed Martin, Giant Food, and Marriott International. The county is also an
incubator for firms engaged in biotechnology and the area has traditionally attracted significant amounts of venture capital. Montgomery County is home to many major federal and private sector
research and development and regulatory agencies, including the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the National Institutes of Health, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
Naval Research and Development Center, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Food and Drug Administration and the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in Bethesda.

Transportation
congestion and federal government spending levels remain threats to future economic development and the quality of life in the area.

The
District of Columbia, in addition to being the seat of the federal government, is a vibrant city with a well-educated, diverse population. According to survey data from the latest
U.S. Census, the estimated July 2014 population of the District of Columbia is approximately 658,893, up from 601,767 in 2010. Median household income, at $69,235 as of 2014, is above the national
median level of $53,482. The growth of residents in the city is due partially to improvements in the city's services and
to the many housing options available, ranging from grand old apartment buildings to Federal era town homes to the most modern condominiums. As of July 2014, the housing market has grown to over
306,174 units. As of December 2015, inventory levels remain tight in the District of Columbia with levels remaining 10% below the five year December average. While the federal government and its
employees are a major factor in the economy, over 100 million square feet of commercial office space support a dynamic business community of more than 21,000 companies. These include law and
accounting firms, trade and professional

associations,
information technology companies, international financial institutions, health and education organizations and research and management companies. Unemployment has decreased with the rate
for December 2015 at 6.6%, which is down from 7.7% in December 2014. The disparity between the high level of unemployment among District of Columbia residents and the strong employment trends reflects
the high level of jobs held by residents of the surrounding suburban jurisdictions. The District of Columbia has a well-educated and highly paid work force. The federal government accounts for
approximately 27% of the employment and private firms provide an additional 68% with local and state government making up the other 5%. Other large employers include the many local universities and
hospitals. Another significant factor in the economy is the leisure and hospitality industry, as Washington, D.C. remains a popular tourist destination for both national and international travelers.

As
a result of the October 31, 2014 merger with Virginia Heritage Bank (the "Merger"), the Bank substantially increased its market presence in Northern Virginia. Fairfax County,
Virginia which is just across the Potomac River and west from Washington, D.C. is a large, affluent jurisdiction with an estimated population of 1,137,538 as of July 2014. This county covers about 395
square miles. Fairfax County is one of the leading technology centers in the United States. Eight Fortune 500 companies are headquartered in the county and 30 of the largest 100 technology federal
contractors in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area are located in Fairfax County. The county has over 116.5 million square feet of office space and is one of the largest suburban
office markets in the United States. The midyear 2013 office vacancy rate was 15.2%, below the national average of 16.5%, as measured in third quarter 2015. It is a thriving residential as well as
business center with 410,287 households, which is expected to grow at about 8.5% between 2010 and 2020. The county is among the most affluent in the country with average annual household income of
$112,102 per annum as of 2014. Total employment was over 593 thousand as of June 2015. Major companies headquartered in the county, which are also major employers, include Capital One
Financial, CSC, Gannett, General Dynamics, Hilton Hotels, Leidos, Sallie Mae, and Inova Health Systems. The county is also home to several federal entities including the CIA, Fort Belvoir and a major
facility of the Smithsonian Institution.

In
2011, the Bank's footprint expanded into Arlington County, Virginia, which has an estimated population of over 226,000 as of July 2014. The county is made up of 26 square miles and is
situated just west of Washington, D.C., directly across the Potomac River. There are approximately 110,601 households with an estimated median household income of $105,120 as of July 2014. There were
over 169,387 employees as of January 2016, working predominantly in or in support of the public sector.
Significant private sector employers include Deloitte, Lockheed Martin Corporation, Virginia Hospital Center and Marriott International, Inc. The unemployment rate was just 2.4% as of December
2015. This is the lowest unemployment rate in the state of Virginia and compares very favorably to the U.S. rate of 5.0%. The population is highly educated, with about 72% of residents over
25 years of age holding at least a bachelor's degree as of 2014.

In
early 2013, the Bank added a branch in Alexandria, Virginia to its network. Alexandria is a city with an estimated population of 150,575 as of July 2014. The city is made up of just
over 15 square miles and sits on the west bank of the Potomac River just south of Arlington, Virginia. There are approximately 75,329 households with an estimated median household income of $87,319 as
of July 2014. The employment base was approximately 95,900 employees as of December 2015, with 76% working in the private sector and 24% working in government roles. Alexandria has over 8,000
businesses and organizations, located in the more than 20 million square feet of office space and over 7 million square feet of retail space existing in the city as of March 2013. The
unemployment rate was just 2.7% as of December 2015. The population is highly educated, with over 61.5% of residents over 25 years of age holding at least a bachelor's degree as of 2014.

Throughout the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, competition is keen from large banking institutions headquartered outside of the area. Although some
consolidation has occurred in the market in the past few years, the Bank continues to compete with other community banks, savings and loan associations, credit unions, mortgage companies, finance
companies and others providing financial services. Among the advantages that many of these large institutions have over the Bank are their abilities to finance extensive advertising campaigns,
maintain extensive branch networks and make technology investments, and to directly offer certain services, such as international banking and trust services, which are not offered directly by the
Bank. Further, the greater capitalization of the larger institutions headquartered out-of-state allows for higher lending limits than the Bank, although the Bank's current lending limit is quite
favorable and able to accommodate the credit needs of most businesses in the Washington D.C. metropolitan area, which distinguishes it from most community banks in the market area. Some of these
competitors have other advantages, such as tax exemption in the case of credit unions, and to some extent lesser regulation in the case of mortgage companies and finance companies, although this
regulatory oversight has undergone dramatic change. As a result of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the "Dodd-Frank Act"), enacted in
July 2010, regulation of all financial firms has been heightened. Under current law, unlimited interstate de novo branching is available to all state
and federally chartered banks. As a result, institutions, which previously were ineligible to establish de novo branches in the Bank's market area, may
elect to do so.

EMPLOYEES

At December 31, 2015 the Bank employed 434 persons on a full time basis (eight of whom are executive officers of the Bank), which compares to 427 employees
at December 31, 2014. None of the Bank's employees are represented by any collective bargaining group and the Bank believes that its employee relations are good. At December 31, 2015,
the Bank provided a benefit program, which included health and dental insurance, a 401(k) plan, life and short and long term disability insurance. During 2015, the Bank provided company paid fitness
facilities in various locations. Additionally, the Company maintains an employee stock purchase plan and a stock-based compensation plan for employees of the Bank who meet certain eligibility
requirements.

REGULATION

Our business and operations are subject to extensive federal and state governmental regulation and supervision. The following is a brief summary of certain
statutes and rules and regulations that affect or will affect us. This summary is not intended to be an exhaustive description of the statutes or regulations applicable to our business. Supervision,
regulation, and examination of the Company by the regulatory agencies is intended primarily for the protection of depositors and the Deposit Insurance Fund, rather than our shareholders.

The Company. The Company is a bank holding company registered under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, (the "Act") and
is subject to
regulation and supervision by the Federal Reserve Board. The Act and other federal laws subject bank holding companies to restrictions on the types of activities in which they may engage, and to a
range of supervisory requirements and activities, including regulatory enforcement actions for violations of laws and regulations and unsafe and unsound banking practices. As a bank holding company,
the Company is required to file with the Federal
Reserve Board an annual report and such other additional information as the Federal Reserve Board may require pursuant to the Act. The Federal Reserve Board may also examine the Company and each of
its subsidiaries. The Company is subject to risk-based capital requirements adopted by the Federal Reserve Board, which are substantially identical to those applicable to the Bank, and which are
described below.

The
Act requires approval of the Federal Reserve Board for, among other things, a bank holding company's direct or indirect acquisition of control of more than five percent (5%) of the
voting shares, or

substantially
all the assets, of any bank or the merger or consolidation by a bank holding company with another bank holding company. The Act also generally permits the acquisition by a bank holding
company of control or substantially all the assets of any bank located in a state other than the home state of the bank holding company, except where the bank has not been in existence for the minimum
period of time required by state law; but if the bank is at least 5 years old, the Federal Reserve Board may approve the acquisition.

With
certain limited exceptions, a bank holding company is prohibited from acquiring control of any voting shares of any company which is not a bank or bank holding company and from
engaging directly or indirectly in any activity other than banking or managing or controlling banks or furnishing services to or performing service for its authorized subsidiaries. A bank holding
company may, however, engage in or acquire an interest in, a company that engages in activities which the Federal Reserve Board has determined by order or regulation to be so closely related to
banking or managing or controlling banks as to be properly incident thereto. In making such a determination, the Federal Reserve Board is required to consider whether the performance of such
activities can reasonably be expected to produce benefits to the public, such as convenience, increased competition or gains in efficiency, which outweigh possible adverse effects, such as undue
concentration of resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interest or unsound banking practices. The Federal Reserve Board is also empowered to differentiate between activities
commenced de novo and activities commenced by the acquisition, in whole or in part, of a going concern. Some of the activities that the Federal Reserve
Board has determined by regulation to be closely related to banking include making or servicing loans, performing certain data processing services, acting as a fiduciary or investment or financial
advisor, and making investments in corporations or projects designed primarily to promote community welfare.

Subsidiary
banks of a bank holding company are subject to certain restrictions imposed by the Federal Reserve Act on any extensions of credit to the bank holding company or any of its
subsidiaries, or investments in the stock or other securities thereof, and on the taking of such stock or securities as collateral for loans to any borrower. Further, a bank holding company and any
subsidiary bank are prohibited from engaging in certain tie-in arrangements in connection with the extension of credit. A subsidiary bank may not extend credit, lease or sell property, or furnish any
services, or fix or vary the
consideration for any of the foregoing on the condition that: (i) the customer obtain or provide some additional credit, property or services from or to such bank other than a loan, discount,
deposit or trust service; (ii) the customer obtain or provide some additional credit, property or service from or to the Company or any other subsidiary of the Company; or (iii) the
customer not obtain some other credit, property or service from competitors, except for reasonable requirements to assure the soundness of credit extended.

The
Gramm Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (the "GLB Act") allows a bank holding company or other company to certify status as a financial holding company, which allows such company to engage in
activities that are financial in nature, that are incidental to such activities, or are complementary to such activities. The GLB Act enumerates certain activities that are deemed financial in nature,
such as underwriting insurance or acting as an insurance principal, agent or broker, underwriting, dealing in or making markets in securities, and engaging in merchant banking under certain
restrictions. It also authorizes the Federal Reserve Board to determine by regulation what other activities are financial in nature, or incidental or complementary thereto. The GLB Act allows a wider
array of companies to own banks, which could result in companies with resources substantially in excess of the Company's entering into competition with the Company and the Bank. The Company has not
elected financial holding company status.

The Bank. The Bank is a Maryland chartered commercial bank and a member of the Federal Reserve System (a "state member bank") whose
accounts are
insured by the Deposit Insurance Fund of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the "FDIC") up to the maximum legal limits of the FDIC. The Bank is subject to regulation, supervision and regular
examination by the Maryland Department of Financial Institutions and the Federal Reserve Board. The regulations of these various agencies govern

most
aspects of the Bank's business, including required reserves against deposits, loans, investments, mergers and acquisitions, borrowing, dividends and location and number of branch offices.

The
laws and regulations governing the Bank generally have been promulgated to protect depositors and the Deposit Insurance Fund, and not for the purpose of protecting shareholders.

Competition
among commercial banks, savings and loan associations, and credit unions has increased following enactment of legislation, which greatly expanded the ability of banks and
bank holding companies to engage in interstate banking or acquisition activities. As a result of federal and state legislation, banks in the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan area can, subject to limited
restrictions, acquire or merge with a bank in another jurisdiction, and can branch de novo in any jurisdiction.

Banking
is a business, which depends on interest rate differentials. In general, the differences between the interest paid by a bank on its deposits and its other borrowings and the
interest received by a bank on loans extended to its customers and securities held in its investment portfolio constitute the major portion of the bank's earnings. Thus, the earnings and growth of the
Bank will be subject to the influence of economic conditions generally, both domestic and foreign, and also to the monetary and fiscal policies of the United States and its agencies, particularly the
Federal Reserve Board, which regulates the supply of money through various means including open market dealings in United States government securities. The nature and timing of changes in such
policies and their impact on the Bank cannot be predicted.

Branching and Interstate Banking. The federal banking agencies are authorized to approve interstate bank merger transactions without
regard to
whether such transaction is prohibited by the law of any state, unless the home state of one of the banks has opted out of the interstate bank merger provisions of the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking
and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (the "Riegle-Neal Act") by adopting a law after the date of enactment of the Riegle-Neal Act and prior to June 1, 1997 which applies equally to all
out-of-state banks and expressly prohibits merger transactions involving out-of-state banks. Interstate acquisitions of branches are permitted only if the law of the state in which the branch is
located permits such acquisitions. Such interstate bank mergers and branch acquisitions are also subject to the nationwide and statewide insured deposit concentration limitations described in the
Riegle-Neal Act. Washington, D.C., Maryland and Virginia have each enacted laws, which permit interstate acquisitions of banks and bank branches. The Dodd-Frank Act authorizes national and
state banks to establish de novo branches in other states to the same extent as a bank chartered by that state would be permitted to branch. Previously,
banks could only establish branches in other states if the host state expressly permitted out-of-state banks to establish branches in that state. Although the District of Columbia, Maryland and
Virginia had all enacted laws, which permitted banks in these jurisdictions to branch freely, the branching provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act could result in banks from a wider variety of states
establishing de novo branches in the Bank's market area.

The
GLB Act made substantial changes in the historic restrictions on non-bank activities of bank holding companies, and allows affiliations between types of companies that were
previously prohibited. The GLB Act also allows banks to engage in a wider array of nonbanking activities through "financial subsidiaries."

USA Patriot Act. Under the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct
Terrorism Act,
commonly referred to as the "USA Patriot Act" or the "Patriot Act," financial institutions are subject to prohibitions against specified financial transactions and account relationships, as well as
enhanced due diligence standards intended to detect, and prevent, the use of the United States financial system for money laundering and terrorist financing activities. The Patriot Act requires
financial institutions, including banks, to establish anti-money laundering programs, including employee training and independent audit requirements, meet minimum standards specified by the act,
follow minimum standards for customer identification and maintenance of customer identification records, and regularly compare customer lists against lists of suspected
terrorists, terrorist organizations and money launderers. The costs or other effects of the compliance burdens imposed by the Patriot Act or future

Capital Adequacy. The Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC have adopted risk-based and leverage capital adequacy requirements, pursuant
to which they
assess the adequacy of capital in examining and supervising banks and bank holding companies and in analyzing bank regulatory applications. Risk-based capital requirements determine the adequacy of
capital based on the risk inherent in various classes of assets and off-balance sheet items. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the Federal Reserve Board is required to apply consolidated capital requirements
to depository institution holding companies that are no less stringent than those currently applied to depository institutions. The Dodd-Frank Act additionally requires capital requirements to be
countercyclical so that the required amount of capital increases in times of economic expansion and decreases in times of economic contraction, consistent with safety and soundness.

State
member banks are expected to meet a minimum ratio of total qualifying capital (the sum of core capital (Tier 1) and supplementary capital (Tier 2) to risk weighted
assets of 8%. At least half of this amount (4%) should be in the form of core capital.

The
description below relates to the requirements, as they existed through December 31, 2014, subsequent to which the revised capital rules implementing Basel III became
applicable to the Bank. See "Changes in Capital Requirements" below.

Tier 1
Capital generally consists of the sum of common shareholders' equity and perpetual preferred stock (subject in the case of the latter to limitations on the kind and amount
of such stock which may be included as Tier 1 Capital), less goodwill, without adjustment for changes in the market value of securities classified as "available-for-sale," together with a
limited amount of other qualifying interests, including trust preferred securities. Tier 2 Capital consists of the following: hybrid capital instruments; perpetual preferred stock which is not
otherwise eligible to be included as Tier 1 Capital; term subordinated debt and intermediate-term preferred stock; and, subject to limitations, general allowances for loan losses and excess
restricted core capital elements. Assets are adjusted under the risk-based guidelines to take into account different risk characteristics, with the categories ranging from 0% (requiring no risk-based
capital) for assets such as cash, to 100% for the bulk of assets which are typically held by a bank holding company, including certain multi-family residential and commercial real
estate loans, commercial business loans and consumer loans. Residential first mortgage loans on one to four family residential real estate and certain seasoned multi-family residential real estate
loans, which are not 90 days or more past due or nonperforming and which have been made in accordance with prudent underwriting standards are assigned a 50% level in the risk-weighing system,
as are certain privately-issued mortgage-backed securities representing indirect ownership of such loans. Off-balance sheet items also are adjusted to take into account certain risk characteristics.
Under guidance adopted by the federal banking agencies, banks which have concentrations in construction, land development or commercial real estate loans (other than loans for majority owner occupied
properties) would be expected to maintain higher levels of risk management and, potentially, higher levels of capital.

In
addition to the risk-based capital requirements, the Federal Reserve Board has established a minimum 3.0% Leverage Capital Ratio (Tier 1 Capital to total adjusted assets)
requirement for the most highly-rated banks, with an additional cushion of at least 100 to 200 basis points for all other banks, which effectively increases the minimum Leverage Capital Ratio for such
other banks to 4.0% - 5.0% or more. The highest-rated banks are those that are not anticipating or experiencing significant growth and have well diversified risk, including no undue
interest rate risk exposure, excellent asset quality, high liquidity, good earnings and, in general, those which are considered a strong banking organization. A bank having less than the minimum
Leverage Capital Ratio requirement shall, within 60 days of the date as of which it fails to comply with such requirement, submit a reasonable plan describing the means and timing by which the
bank shall achieve its minimum Leverage Capital Ratio requirement. A bank which fails to file such plan is deemed to be operating in an unsafe and unsound manner, and could subject the bank to a

cease-and-desist
order. Any insured depository institution with a Leverage Capital Ratio that is less than 2.0% is deemed to be operating in an unsafe or unsound condition pursuant to
Section 8(a) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (the "FDIA") and is subject to potential termination of deposit insurance. However, such an institution will not be subject to an enforcement
proceeding solely on account of its capital ratios, if it has entered into and is in compliance with a written agreement to increase its Leverage Capital Ratio and to take such other action as may be
necessary for the institution to be operated in a safe and sound manner. The capital regulations also provide, among other things, for the issuance of a capital directive, which is a final order
issued to a bank that fails to maintain minimum capital or to restore its capital to the minimum capital requirement within a specified time period. Such directive is enforceable in the same manner as
a final cease-and-desist order.

The
capital ratios described above are the minimum levels that the federal banking agencies expect. Our state and federal regulators have the discretion to require us to maintain higher
capital levels based upon our concentrations of loans, the risk of our lending or other activities, the performance of our loan and investment portfolios and other factors. Failure to maintain such
higher capital expectations could result in a lower composite regulatory rating, which would impact our deposit insurance premiums and could affect our ability to borrow and costs of borrowing, and
could result in additional or more severe enforcement actions. In respect of institutions with high concentrations of
loans in areas deemed to be higher risk, or during periods of significant economic stress, regulators may require an institution to maintain a higher level of capital, and/or to maintain more
stringent risk management measures, than those required by these regulations.

Changes in Capital Requirements. In December 2010, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision released its final framework for
strengthening
international capital and liquidity regulation ("Basel III"). The regulations adopted by the federal banking agencies, when fully phased-in, will require bank holding companies and their bank
subsidiaries to maintain more capital, with a greater emphasis on common equity.

The
Basel III final capital framework, among other things, (i) introduces as a new capital measure "Common Equity Tier 1" ("CET1"), (ii) specifies that Tier 1
capital consists of CET1 and "Additional Tier 1 capital" instruments meeting specified requirements, (iii) defines CET1 narrowly by requiring that most adjustments to regulatory capital
measures be made to CET1 and not to the other components of capital and (iv) expands the scope of the adjustments as compared to existing regulations.

When
fully phased in by January 1, 2019, Basel III requires banks to maintain: (i) as a newly adopted international standard, a minimum ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted
assets of at least 4.5%, plus a "capital conservation buffer" of 2.5%; (ii) a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 6.0%, plus the capital conservation
buffer, or 8.5%; (iii) a minimum ratio of Total (Tier 1 plus Tier 2) capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 8.0% plus the capital conservation buffer, or 10.5%; and
(iv) as a newly adopted international standard, a minimum leverage ratio of 3%, calculated as the ratio of Tier 1 capital to balance sheet exposures plus certain off-balance sheet
exposures (computed as the average for each quarter of the month-end ratios for the quarter).

Basel
III also provides for a "countercyclical capital buffer," generally to be imposed when federal banking agencies determine that excess aggregate credit growth becomes associated
with a buildup of systemic risk that would be a CET1 add-on to the capital conservation buffer in the range of 0% to 2.5% when fully implemented. The capital conservation buffer is designed to absorb
losses during periods of economic stress.

Banking
institutions with a ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets above the minimum but below the conservation buffer (or below the combined capital conservation buffer and
countercyclical capital buffer, when the latter is applied) may face constraints on its ability to pay dividends, effect equity repurchases and pay discretionary bonuses to executive officers, which
constraints vary based on the amount of the shortfall.

The
Basel III final framework provides for a number of new deductions from and adjustments to CET1. These include, for example, the requirement that mortgage servicing rights, deferred
tax assets dependent upon future taxable income and significant investments in non-consolidated financial entities be deducted from CET1 to the extent that any one such category exceeds 10% of CET1 or
all such categories in the aggregate exceed 15% of CET1.

The
federal banking agencies adopted a final rulemaking in July 2013 (the "Basel III Rule") to implement Basel III under regulations substantially consistent with the above. The Basel
III Rule also includes, as part of the definition of CET1 capital, a requirement that banking institutions include the amount of additional other comprehensive income ("AOCI," which primarily consists
of unrealized gains and losses on available for sale securities, which are not required to be treated as other-than-temporary impairment, net of tax) in calculating regulatory capital, unless the
institution makes a one-time opt-out election from this provision in connection with the filing of its first regulatory reports after applicability of the Basel III Rule to that institution. The
Company did, in fact, opt-out of this requirement as allowed by Basel III and, as such, does not include AOCI in its regulatory capital calculation. The Basel III Rule also requires a 4% minimum
leverage ratio.

The
Basel III Rule also makes changes to the manner of calculating risk weighted assets. New methodologies for determining risk weighted assets in the general capital rules are included,
including revisions to recognition of credit risk mitigation, including a greater recognition of financial collateral and a wider range of eligible guarantors. They also include risk weighting of
equity exposures and past due loans; and higher (greater than 100%) risk weighting for certain commercial real estate exposures that have higher credit risk profiles, including higher loan to value
and equity components. In particular, loans categorized as "high-volatility commercial real estate" ("HVCRE") loans are required to be assigned a 150% risk weighting, and require additional capital
support. HVCRE loans are defined to include any credit facility that finances or has financed the acquisition, development or construction of real property, unless it finances: 1-4 family residential
properties; certain community development investments; agricultural land used or usable for, and whose value is based on, agricultural use; or commercial real estate projects in which: (i) the
LTV is less than the applicable maximum supervisory LTV ratio established by the bank regulatory agencies; (ii) the borrower has contributed cash or unencumbered readily marketable assets, or
has paid development expenses out of pocket, equal to at least 15% of the appraised "as completed" value; (iii) the borrower contributes its 15% before the bank advances any funds; and
(iv) the capital contributed by the borrower, and any funds internally generated by the project, is contractually required to remain in the project until the facility is converted to permanent
financing, sold or paid in full.

As
discussed below, the Basel III Rule also integrates the new capital requirements into the prompt corrective action provisions under Section 38 of the FDIA.

The
Basel III Rule became applicable to the Company and the Bank on January 1, 2015. The capital conservation buffer requirement will be phased in beginning January 1,
2016, at 0.625% of risk-weighted assets, increasing each year until fully implemented at 2.5% on January 1, 2019. During 2015, the Company and Bank elected to exclude AOCI in calculating
regulatory capital as permitted under the Basel III Rule. Basel III subjects the higher risk loans made by ECV to higher risk weightings, and as such these loans require additional capital, or
substantial restructuring in order to avoid such higher risk weights. The Company's $70 million of subordinated notes due 2024 qualify for Tier 2 capital treatment under the
Basel III Rule. Overall, the Company believes that implementation of the Basel III Rule will not have a material adverse effect on the Company's or the Bank's capital ratios, earnings,
shareholder's equity, or its ability to pay dividends, effect stock repurchases or pay discretionary bonuses to executive officers.

Prompt Corrective Action. Under Section 38 of the FDIA, each federal banking agency is required to implement a system of prompt
corrective
action for institutions, which it regulates. The federal banking agencies have promulgated substantially similar regulations to implement the system of prompt corrective

action
established by Section 38 of the FDIA. Under the regulations effective through December 31, 2014, a bank shall be deemed to be: (i) "well capitalized" if it has a Total
Risk Based Capital Ratio of 10.0% or more, a Tier 1 Risk Based Capital Ratio of 6.0% or more, a Leverage Capital Ratio of 5.0% or more and is not subject to any written capital order or
directive; (ii) "adequately capitalized" if it has a Total Risk Based Capital Ratio of 8.0% or more, a Tier 1 Risk Based Capital Ratio of 4.0% or more and a Tier 1 Leverage
Capital Ratio of 4.0% or more (3.0% under certain circumstances) and does not meet the definition of "well capitalized;" (iii) "undercapitalized" if it has a Total Risk Based Capital Ratio that
is less than 8.0%, a Tier 1 Risk based Capital Ratio that is less than 4.0% or a Leverage Capital Ratio that is less than 4.0% (3.0% under certain circumstances); (iv) "significantly
undercapitalized" if it has a Total Risk Based Capital Ratio that is less than 6.0%, a Tier 1 Risk Based Capital Ratio that is less than 3.0% or a Leverage Capital Ratio that is less than 3.0%;
and (v) "critically undercapitalized" if it has a ratio of tangible equity to total assets that is equal to or less than 2.0%.

An
institution generally must file a written capital restoration plan which meets specified requirements with an appropriate federal banking agency within 45 days of the
date the institution receives notice or is deemed to have notice that it is undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized or critically undercapitalized. A federal banking agency must provide the
institution with written notice of approval or disapproval within 60 days after receiving a capital restoration plan, subject to extensions by the applicable agency.

An
institution which is required to submit a capital restoration plan must concurrently submit a performance guaranty by each company that controls the institution. Such guaranty shall
be limited to the lesser of (i) an amount equal to 5.0% of the institution's total assets at the time the institution was notified or deemed to have notice that it was undercapitalized or
(ii) the amount necessary at such time to restore the relevant capital measures of the institution to the levels required for the institution to be classified as adequately capitalized. Such a
guaranty shall expire after the federal banking agency notifies the institution that it has remained adequately capitalized for each of four consecutive calendar quarters. An institution which fails
to submit a written capital restoration plan within the requisite period, including any required performance guaranty, or fails in any material respect to implement a capital restoration plan, shall
be subject to the restrictions in Section 38 of the FDIA which are applicable to significantly undercapitalized institutions.

A
"critically undercapitalized institution" is to be placed in conservatorship or receivership within 90 days unless the FDIC formally determines that forbearance from such action
would better protect the Deposit Insurance Fund. Unless the FDIC or other appropriate federal banking agency makes specific further findings and certifies that the institution is viable and is not
expected to fail, an institution that remains critically undercapitalized on average during the fourth calendar quarter after the date it becomes critically undercapitalized must be placed in
receivership. The general rule is that the FDIC will be appointed as receiver within 90 days after a bank becomes critically undercapitalized unless extremely good cause is shown and an
extension is agreed to by the federal regulators. In general, good cause is defined as capital, which has been raised and is imminently available for infusion into the Bank except for certain
technical requirements, which may delay the infusion for a period of time beyond the 90 day time period.

Immediately
upon becoming undercapitalized, an institution shall become subject to the provisions of Section 38 of the FDIA, which (i) restrict payment of capital
distributions and management fees; (ii) require that the appropriate federal banking agency monitor the condition of the institution and its efforts to restore its capital; (iii) require
submission of a capital restoration plan; (iv) restrict the growth of the institution's assets; and (v) require prior approval of certain expansion proposals. The appropriate federal
banking agency for an undercapitalized institution also may take any number of discretionary supervisory actions if the agency determines that any of these actions is necessary to resolve the problems
of the institution at the least possible long-term cost to the deposit insurance fund, subject in certain cases to specified procedures. These discretionary supervisory actions include: requiring the
institution to raise additional capital; restricting transactions with affiliates; requiring divestiture of the institution or the sale

of
the institution to a willing purchaser; and any other supervisory action that the agency deems appropriate. These and additional mandatory and permissive supervisory actions may be taken with
respect to significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized institutions.

Additionally,
under Section 11(c)(5) of the FDIA, a conservator or receiver may be appointed for an institution where: (i) an institution's obligations exceed its assets;
(ii) there is substantial dissipation of the institution's assets or earnings as a result of any violation of law or any unsafe or unsound practice; (iii) the institution is in an unsafe
or unsound condition; (iv) there is a willful violation of a cease-and-desist order; (v) the institution is unable to pay its obligations in the ordinary course of business;
(vi) losses or threatened losses deplete all or substantially all of an institution's capital, and there is no reasonable prospect of becoming "adequately capitalized" without assistance;
(vii) there is any violation of law or unsafe or unsound practice or condition that is likely to cause insolvency or substantial dissipation of assets or earnings, weaken the institution's
condition, or otherwise seriously prejudice the interests of depositors or the insurance fund; (viii) an institution ceases to be insured; (ix) the institution is undercapitalized and
has no reasonable prospect that it will become adequately capitalized, fails to become adequately capitalized when required to do so, or fails to submit or materially implement a capital restoration
plan; or (x) the institution is critically undercapitalized or otherwise has substantially insufficient capital.

As
noted above, the Basel III Rule integrates the new capital requirements into the prompt corrective action category definitions. As of January 1, 2015, the following capital
requirements applied to the Company for purposes of Section 38.

Capital Category

Total Risk-Based
Capital Ratio

Tier 1 Risk-Based
Capital Ratio

Common Equity
Tier 1 Capital Ratio

Leverage Ratio

Tangible Equity
to Assets

Supplemental
Leverage Ratio

Well Capitalized

10% or greater

8% or greater

6.5% or greater

5% or greater

n/a

n/a

Adequately Capitalized

8% or greater

6% or greater

4.5% or greater

4% or greater

n/a

3% or greater

Undercapitalized

Less than 8%

Less than 6%

Less than 4.5%

Less than 4%

n/a

Less than 3%

Significantly Undercapitalized

Less than 6%

Less than 4%

Less than3%

Less than 3%

n/a

n/a

Critically Undercapitalized

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Less than 2%

n/a

Regulatory Enforcement Authority. Federal banking law grants substantial enforcement powers to federal banking agencies. This
enforcement authority
includes, among other things, the ability to assess civil money penalties, to issue cease-and-desist or removal orders and to initiate injunctive actions against banking organizations and
institution-affiliated parties. In general, these enforcement actions may be initiated for violations of laws and regulations and unsafe or unsound practices. Other actions or inactions may provide
the basis for enforcement action, including misleading or untimely reports filed with regulatory authorities.

As
a result of the volatility and instability in the financial system in recent years, Congress, the bank regulatory authorities and other government agencies have called for or proposed
additional regulation and restrictions on the activities, practices and operations of banks and their holding companies. While many of these proposals relate to institutions that have accepted
investments from, or sold troubled assets to, the Department of the Treasury or other government agencies, or otherwise participate in government programs intended to promote financial stabilization,
the Congress and the federal banking agencies have broad authority to require all banks and holding companies to adhere to more rigorous or costly operating procedures, corporate governance
procedures, or to engage in activities or practices which they would not otherwise elect. Any such requirement could adversely affect the Company's business and results of operations.

The Dodd-Frank Act. The Dodd-Frank Act made significant changes to the current bank regulatory structure, which affects the lending,
deposit,
investment, trading and operating activities of financial institutions and their holding companies. The Dodd-Frank Act requires a number of federal agencies to adopt a broad range of new rules and
regulations, and to prepare various studies and reports for Congress. The federal agencies are given significant discretion in drafting these rules and regulations, and

consequently,
many of the details and much of the impact of the Dodd-Frank Act may not be known for some time. Although it is not possible to determine the ultimate impact of this statute until the
extensive rulemaking is complete and becomes effective, the following provisions are considered to be of greatest significance to the Company:



Expands the authority of the Federal Reserve Board to examine bank holding companies and their subsidiaries, including insured
depository institutions.



Requires a bank holding company to be well capitalized and well managed to receive approval of an interstate bank acquisition.



Provides mortgage reform provisions regarding a customer's ability to pay and making more loans subject to provisions for higher-cost
loans and new disclosures.



Creates the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ("CFPB"), which has rulemaking authority for a wide range of consumer protection laws
that apply to all banks, and has broad powers to supervise and enforce consumer protection laws.



Creates the Financial Stability Oversight Council ("FSOC") with authority to identify institutions and practices that might pose a
systemic risk.

Permits national and state banks to establish interstate branches to the same extent as the branch host state allows establishment of
in-state branches.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The Dodd-Frank Act created the CFPB, a new, independent federal agency within the Federal Reserve
System having
broad rulemaking, supervisory and enforcement powers under various federal consumer financial protection laws, including the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Truth in Lending Act, Real Estate Settlement
Procedures Act, Fair Credit Reporting Act, Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the consumer financial privacy provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and certain other statutes. The CFPB, which began
operations on July 21, 2011, has examination and primary enforcement authority with respect to depository institutions with $10 billion or more in assets. Smaller institutions, including
the Bank, are subject to rules promulgated by the CFPB but continue to be examined and supervised by federal banking agencies for compliance with federal consumer protection laws and regulations. The
CFPB also has authority to prevent unfair, deceptive or abusive practices in connection with the offering of consumer financial products. The Dodd-Frank Act permits states to adopt consumer protection
laws and standards that are more stringent than those adopted at the federal level and, in certain circumstances, permits state attorneys general to enforce compliance with both the state and federal
laws and regulations.

The
CFPB has proposed or issued a number of important rules affecting a wide range of consumer financial products. Many of these rules took effect in January 2014 and October 2015. The
changes resulting from the Dodd-Frank Act and CFPB rulemakings may impact the profitability of our business activities, limit our ability to make, or the desirability of making, certain types of
loans, including non-qualified mortgage loans, require us to change our business practices, impose upon us more stringent capital, liquidity and leverage ratio requirements or otherwise adversely
affect our business or profitability. The changes may also require us to dedicate significant management attention and resources to evaluate and make necessary changes to comply with the new statutory
and regulatory requirements.

The
CFPB has concentrated much of its rulemaking efforts on reforms related to residential mortgage transactions. In 2013, the CFPB issued final rules related to a borrower's ability to
repay and qualified mortgage standards, mortgage servicing standards, loan originator compensation standards, requirements for high-cost mortgages, appraisal and escrow standards and requirements for
higher-priced mortgages. In November 2013, the CFPB issued final rules establishing integrated disclosure requirements for lenders and settlement agents in connection with most closed end, real estate
secured consumer loans. The Bank fully complies with these rules, which became effective October 2015. In October 2015, the CFPB issued final rules which, among other things, expand the scope of
information lenders must report in connection with mortgage and other housing-related loan applications under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. These rules include significant regulatory and
compliance changes and are expected to have a broad impact on the financial services industry. The Bank intends to fully comply with these rules, which become effective on a rolling basis between
January 1, 2017 and January 1, 2019.

The
final rule implementing the Dodd-Frank Act requirement that lenders determine whether a consumer has the ability to repay a mortgage loan, which went into effect on
January 10, 2014, establishes certain minimum requirements for creditors when making ability to pay determinations, and establishes certain protections from liability for mortgages meeting the
definition of "qualified mortgages." Generally, the rule applies to all consumer-purpose, closed-end loans secured by a dwelling including home-purchase loans, refinances and home equity
loanswhether first or subordinate lien. The rule does not cover, among other things, home equity lines of credit or other open-end credit; temporary or "bridge" loans with a term of
12 months or less, such as a loan to finance the initial construction of a dwelling; a construction phase of 12 months or less of a construction-to-permanent loan; and business-purpose
loans, even if secured by a dwelling. The rule affords greater legal protections for lenders making qualified mortgages that are not "higher priced." Qualified mortgages must generally satisfy
detailed requirements related to product features, underwriting standards, and a points and fees requirement whereby the total points and fees on a mortgage loan cannot exceed specified amounts or
percentages of the total loan amount. Mandatory features of a qualified mortgage include: (1) a loan term not exceeding 30 years; and (2) regular periodic payments that do not
result in negative amortization, deferral of principal repayment, or a balloon payment. Further, the rule clarifies that qualified mortgages do not include "no-doc" loans and loans with negative
amortization, interest-only payments, or balloon payments. The rule creates special categories of qualified mortgages originated by certain smaller creditors. In January 2015, the CFPB issued a
proposed rule that would provide regulatory relief to a broader set of smaller lenders. Among other things, the proposed rule would (1) increase the loan origination limit to qualify for
"smaller creditor" status from 500 loans to 2,000 loans annually, (2) extend the transition period for smaller lenders seeking to make qualified mortgages with a balloon payment feature to
April 1, 2016. Our business strategy, product offerings, and profitability may change as the rule is interpreted by the regulators and courts.

The
final rule adopting new mortgage servicing standards, which took effect January 2014, imposes new requirements regarding force-placed insurance, mandates certain notices prior to
rate adjustments on adjustable rate mortgages, and establishes requirements for periodic disclosures to borrowers. These requirements will affect notices to be given to consumers as to delinquency,
foreclosure alternatives, modification applications, interest rate adjustments and options for avoiding "force-placed" insurance. Servicers will be prohibited from processing foreclosures when a loan
modification is pending, and must wait until a loan is more than 120 days delinquent before initiating a foreclosure action. Servicers must provide direct and ongoing access to its personnel,
and provide prompt review of any loss mitigation application. Servicers must maintain accurate and accessible mortgage records for the life of a loan and
until one year after the loan is paid off or transferred. These new standards are expected to increase the cost and compliance risks of servicing mortgage loans. While the Bank has a general practice
of selling the residential mortgage loans it originates in the secondary market, it continues to engage in servicing activities for the loans it maintains in its portfolio. We cannot predict the
ultimate outcome of these inquiries, actions, or regulatory changes or the impact that they could have on our financial condition, results of operations, or business.

Additionally, the CFPB has focused on the area of automotive finance, particularly with respect to indirect financing arrangements and fair lending compliance. In
March 2013, the CFPB provided guidance about compliance with fair lending requirements of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and its implementing regulations for indirect automotive finance companies
that permit dealers to charge annual percentage rates to consumers in excess of buy rates used by the finance company to calculate the price paid to acquire an assignment of the retail installment
sale contract.

FDIC Insurance Premiums. The FDIC maintains a risk-based assessment system for determining deposit insurance premiums. Four risk
categories (I-IV),
each subject to different premium rates, ranging from a low of 2.5 basis points up to 45 basis points, are established based upon an institution's status as well capitalized, adequately capitalized or
undercapitalized, and the institution's supervisory rating. An
insured institution is required to pay deposit insurance premiums on its assessment base in accordance with its risk category. In general, a bank's assessment base is determined by subtracting the
bank's tangible equity and certain allowable deductions from its consolidated average assets. There are three adjustments that can be made to an institution's initial base assessment rate:
(1) a potential decrease for long-term unsecured debt, including senior and subordinated debt and, for small institutions, a portion of Tier 1 capital; (2) a potential increase
for secured liabilities above a threshold amount; and (3) for non-Risk Category I institutions, a potential increase for brokered deposits above a threshold amount. The FDIC may also
impose special assessments from time to time.

The
Dodd-Frank Act permanently increased the maximum deposit insurance amount for banks, savings institutions and credit unions to $250 thousand per depositor. The Dodd-Frank Act
also broadened the base for FDIC insurance assessments. Assessments are now based on a financial institution's average consolidated total assets less tangible equity capital. The Dodd-Frank Act
requires the FDIC to increase the reserve ratio of the Deposit Insurance Fund from 1.15% to 1.35% of insured deposits by 2020 and eliminates the requirement that the FDIC pay dividends to insured
depository institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds certain thresholds. The Dodd-Frank Act eliminated the statutory prohibition against the payment of interest on business checking accounts.

Increased Focus on Lending to Members of the Military. The federal banking agencies and the Department of Justice have recently
increased its focus
on financial institution compliance with the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA). The SCRA requires a bank to cap the interest rate at 6% for any loan to a member of the military who goes on active
duty after taking out the loan. It also limits the actions the bank can take when a servicemember is in foreclosure. The Bank fully complies with this rule.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

An investment in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. Before making an investment decision, you
should carefully read and consider the risk factors described below as well as the other information included in this report and other documents we file with the SEC, as the same may be updated from
time to time. Any of these risks, if they actually occur, could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Additional risks and uncertainties not
currently known to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial may also materially and adversely affect us. In any such case, you could lose all or a portion of your original
investment.

The price of our common stock may fluctuate significantly, which may make it difficult for investors
to resell shares of common stock at a time or price they find attractive.

Our stock price may fluctuate significantly as a result of a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. In addition to
those described in "Caution About Forward Looking Statements," these factors include:

Changes in financial estimates or publication of research reports and recommendations by financial analysts or actions taken by rating
agencies with respect to us or other financial institutions;



Reports in the press or investment community generally or relating to our reputation or the financial services industry;



Strategic actions by us or our competitors, such as acquisitions, restructurings, dispositions or financings;



Fluctuations in the stock price and operating results of our competitors;



Future sales of our equity or equity-related securities;



Proposed or adopted regulatory changes or developments;



Anticipated or pending investigations, proceedings, or litigation that may involve or affect us;



Domestic and international economic and political factors unrelated to our performance; and



General market conditions and, in particular, developments related to market conditions for the financial services industry.

In
addition, in recent years, the stock market in general has experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations. This volatility has had a significant effect on the market price of
securities issued by many companies, including for reasons unrelated to their operating performance. These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect our stock price, notwithstanding our operating
results. We expect that the market price of our common stock will continue to fluctuate and there can be no assurances about the levels of the market prices for our common stock.

Trading in our common stock has been moderate. As a result, shareholders may not be able to quickly
and easily sell their common stock, particularly in large quantities.

Although our common stock is listed for trading on NASDAQ and a number of brokers offer to make a market in our common stock on a
regular basis, trading volume to date has been limited, averaging approximately 128,583 shares per day for 2015 and 164,377 shares per day through February 19, 2016. There can be no assurance
that a more active and liquid market for our common stock will develop or can be maintained. As a result, shareholders may find it difficult to sell a significant number of shares of our common stock
at the prevailing market price.

Our ability to pay dividends on our common stock, or repurchase shares of common stock may be
limited.

The payment of a cash dividend on common stock will depend largely upon the ability of the Bank, the Company's principal operating
business, to declare and pay dividends to the Company. Payment of dividends on the common stock will also depend upon the Bank's earnings, financial condition, and need for funds, as well as laws,
regulations and governmental policies applicable to the Company and the Bank, which limit the amount of dividends that may be declared. Additionally, under the Basel III Rule, banking institutions
that do not meet certain CET1 to risk-weighted asset thresholds may face constraints on its ability to pay dividends and/or effect equity repurchases based on the amount of the shortfall, if any.
Refer to "Regulation" under Item 1 and to "Market for Common Stock" under Item 5 for additional information.

We may issue additional equity securities, or engage in other transactions, which could dilute our
book value or affect the priority of our common stock, which may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

Our Board of Directors may determine from time to time that we need to raise additional capital by issuing additional shares of our
common stock or other securities. We are not restricted from issuing additional shares of common stock, including securities that are convertible into or exchangeable for, or that represent the right
to receive, common stock. Because our decision to issue securities in any future offering will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our
control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of any future offerings, or the prices at which such offerings may be effected. Such offerings could be dilutive to common
shareholders. New investors also may have rights, preferences and privileges that are senior to, and that adversely affect, our then current common shareholders. Additionally, if we raise additional
capital by making additional offerings of debt or preferred equity securities, upon liquidation of the Company, holders of our debt securities and shares of preferred stock, and lenders with respect
to other borrowings, will receive distributions of our available assets prior to the holders of our common stock. Additional equity offerings may dilute the holdings of our existing shareholders or
reduce the market price of our common stock, or both. Holders of our common stock are not entitled to preemptive rights or other protections against dilution.

Changes in the value of goodwill and intangible assets could reduce our earnings.

The Company accounts for goodwill and other intangible assets in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"),
which, in general, requires that goodwill not be amortized, but rather that it be tested for impairment at least annually at the reporting unit level using the two step approach. Testing for
impairment of goodwill and intangible assets is performed annually and involves the identification of reporting units and the estimation of fair values. The estimation of fair values involves a high
degree of judgment and subjectivity in the assumptions used. Changes in the local and national economy, the federal and state legislative and regulatory environments for financial institutions, the
stock market, interest rates and other external factors (such as natural disasters or significant world events) may occur from time to time, often with great unpredictability, and may materially
impact the fair value of publicly traded financial institutions and could result in an impairment charge at a future date.

We may not be able to manage future growth and competition.

We have grown rapidly in the past several years, through acquisition and through organic growth. We intend to seek further growth in
the level of our assets and deposits and selectively in the number of our branches, both within our existing footprint and possibly to expand our footprint in the Northern Virginia suburbs, although
no additional branches are currently anticipated in 2016. We cannot provide any assurance that we will continue to be able to maintain our rate of growth at acceptable risk levels and upon acceptable
terms, while managing the costs and implementation risks associated with its growth strategy. We may be unable to continue to increase our volume of loans and deposits or to introduce new products and
services at acceptable risk levels for a variety of reasons, including an inability to maintain capital and liquidity sufficient to support continued growth. If we are successful in continuing our
growth, we cannot assure you that further growth would offer the same levels of potential profitability, or that it would be successful in controlling costs and maintaining asset quality. Accordingly,
an inability to maintain growth, or an inability to effectively manage growth, could adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition and stock price.

Our directors and officers currently own approximately 9.51% of our outstanding shares of common
stock. As a result of their combined ownership, they could make it more difficult to obtain approval for some matters submitted to shareholder vote, including acquisitions of the Company. The results
of the vote may be contrary to the desires or interests of the public shareholders.

Our directors and officers and their affiliates currently own approximately 9.51% of our outstanding shares of common stock, excluding
shares, which may be acquired upon the exercise of options. By voting against a proposal submitted to shareholders, the directors and officers, as a group, may be able to make approval more difficult
for proposals requiring the vote of shareholders, such as some mergers, share exchanges, asset sales, and amendments to the Articles of Incorporation.

Substantial regulatory limitations on changes of control and anti-takeover provisions of Maryland
law may make it more difficult for shareholders to receive a change in control premium.

With certain limited exceptions, federal regulations prohibit a person or company or a group of persons deemed to be "acting in
concert" from, directly or indirectly, acquiring more than 10% (5% if the acquiror is a bank holding company) of any class of the Company's voting stock or obtaining the ability to control in any
manner the election of a majority of its directors or otherwise direct the management or policies of the Company without prior notice or application to and the approval of the Federal Reserve. There
are comparable prior approval requirements for changes in control under Maryland law. Also, the Maryland General Corporation Law, as amended, contains several provisions that may make it more
difficult for a third party to acquire control of the Company without the approval of its Board of Directors, and may make it more difficult or expensive for a third party to acquire a majority of its
outstanding common stock.

The economic environment continues to pose significant challenges for us and could adversely affect
our financial condition and results of operations.

The Company and the Bank are operating in a challenging and uncertain economic environment. Financial institutions continue to be
affected by some softness in the real estate market and constrained financial markets, highlighted by historically low market interest rates. Some concerns about the housing market remain, and higher
levels of foreclosures and weak employment statistics continue in some parts of the country. While conditions have improved since the depths of the financial crisis, both generally and in the Bank's
market area, should declines in real estate values, home sales volumes, and financial stress on borrowers as a result of the uncertain economic environment re-emerge, such events could have an adverse
effect on our borrowers or their customers, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. A worsening of these conditions would likely exacerbate the adverse effects
on the Company and others in the financial institutions industry. For example, deterioration in local economic conditions in our market could drive losses beyond that which is provided for in our
allowance for loan losses. The Company may also face the following risks in connection with these events:



Economic conditions that negatively affect commercial real estate values and the job market may result in a deterioration in credit
quality of our loan portfolio, and such deterioration in credit quality could have a negative impact on our business;



Market developments may affect consumer confidence levels and may cause adverse changes in payment patterns, causing increases in
delinquencies and default rates on loans and other credit facilities;



A reduction in the size, spending or employment levels of the federal, state and/or local governments in the Washington, D.C.
metropolitan area could have a negative effect on the economy in the region, on our customers and on real estate prices;

The methodologies we use to establish our allowance for loan losses may no longer be reliable because they rely on complex judgments,
including forecasts of economic conditions, which may no longer be capable of accurate estimation; and



Compliance with increased regulation of the banking industry may increase our costs, limit our ability to pursue business
opportunities, and divert management efforts.

If
these conditions or similar ones continue to exist or worsen, the Company could experience continuing or increased adverse effects on its financial condition and results of
operations.

Our financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected if our allowance for
credit losses is not sufficient to absorb actual losses or if we are required to increase our allowance for loan losses.

Historically, we have enjoyed a relatively low level of nonperforming assets and net charge-offs, both in absolute dollars, as a
percentage of loans and as compared to many of our peer institutions. As a result of this historical experience, we have incurred a relatively lower loan loss provision expense, which has positively
impacted our earnings. However, should a higher portion of our loans become delinquent, or if some of our loans are only partially repaid, we may experience losses for reasons beyond our control.
Despite our underwriting criteria and historical experience, we may be particularly susceptible to losses due to: (1) the geographic concentration of our loans; (2) the concentration of
higher risk loans, such as commercial real estate, construction and commercial and industrial loans; and (3) the relative lack of seasoning of certain of our loans. As a result, we may not be
able to maintain our relatively low levels of nonperforming assets and charge-offs. Although we believe that our allowance for loan losses is maintained at a level adequate to absorb any inherent
losses in our loan portfolio, these estimates of loan losses are necessarily subjective and their accuracy depends on the outcome of future events. If we need to make significant and unanticipated
increases in our loss allowance in the future, our results of operations and financial condition would be materially adversely affected at that time.

While
we strive to carefully monitor credit quality and to identify loans that may become nonperforming, at any time there are loans included in the portfolio that will result in losses,
but that have not been identified as nonperforming or potential problem loans. We cannot be sure that we will be able to identify deteriorating loans before they become nonperforming assets, or that
we will be able
to limit losses on those loans that are identified. As a result, future additions to the allowance may be necessary.

Economic
conditions and uncertainty in the financial markets could adversely affect our ability to accurately assess our allowance for credit losses. Our ability to assess the
creditworthiness of our customers or to estimate the values of our assets and collateral for loans will be reduced if the models and approaches we use become less predictive of future behaviors,
valuations, assumptions or estimates. We estimate losses inherent in our credit exposure, the adequacy of our allowance for loan losses and the values of certain assets by using estimates based on
difficult, subjective, and complex judgments, including estimates as to the effects of economic conditions and how these economic conditions might affect the ability of our borrowers to repay their
loans or the value of assets.

Changes in accounting standards could impact reported earnings.

From time to time there are changes in the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of our financial
statements. These changes can materially impact how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. In some instances, we could be required to apply a new or revised standard
retroactively, resulting in the restatement of prior period financial statements. Changes currently proposed or expected to be proposed or adopted include requirements that the Company:
(i) calculate the allowance for loan losses on the basis of the current expected credit losses over the lifetime of its loans, which is expected to be applicable beginning in 2019, and may
result in increases in the Company's allowance for loan losses and future provisions for loan losses; and (ii) record the value of and liabilities relating to operating leases on the Bank's
balance sheet. These changes could adversely

Our continued growth depends on our ability to meet minimum regulatory capital levels. Growth and
shareholder returns may be adversely affected if sources of capital are not available to help us meet them.

As we grow, we will have to maintain our regulatory capital levels at or above the required minimum levels, including the new capital
requirements under the Basel III Rule that became applicable to the Company on January 1, 2015. If earnings do not meet our current estimates, if we incur unanticipated losses or expenses, or
if we grow faster than expected, we may need to obtain additional capital sooner than expected or we may be required to reduce our level of assets or reduce our rate of growth in order to maintain
regulatory compliance. Under those circumstances net income and the rate of growth of net income may be adversely affected. Additional issuances of equity securities could have a dilutive effect on
existing shareholders. The significant level of real estate acquisition, development and construction loans in our portfolio, and new loans sought by customers, which may be required to be categorized
as HVCRE loans under the Basel III Rule, could require us to maintain additional capital for these loans as a result of the higher risk weighting attributed to such loans.

Our results of operations, financial condition and the value of our shares may be adversely affected
if we are not able to maintain our historical growth rate.

Since opening for business in 1998, our asset level and net income available to common shareholders have increased rapidly. We may not
be able to achieve comparable results in future years. As our asset size and earnings increase, it may become more difficult to achieve high rates of increase in assets and earnings. Additionally, it
may become more difficult to achieve continued improvements in our expense levels and efficiency ratio. We may not be able to maintain the relatively low levels of nonperforming assets that we have
experienced to date. Declines in the rate of growth of income or assets or deposits, and increases in operating expenses or nonperforming assets may have an adverse impact on the value of the common
stock.

We are subject to liquidity risk in our operations.

Liquidity risk is the possibility of being unable to meet obligations as they come due, pay deposits when withdrawn, and fund loan and
investment opportunities as they arise because of an inability to liquidate assets or obtain adequate funding on a timely basis, at a reasonable cost and within acceptable risk tolerances. If a
financial institution is unable to meet its payment obligations on a daily basis, it is subject to being placed into receivership, regardless of its capital levels. Our largest source of liquidity is
customer deposit accounts, including noninterest bearing demand deposit accounts, which constituted 27% of our total deposits at December 31, 2015. If we are unable to
increase customer deposits in an amount sufficient to fund loan growth, we may be required to rely on other, potentially more expensive, sources of liquidity, such as FHLB borrowings, brokered
deposits and repurchase agreements, to fund loan growth, which could adversely affect our earnings, or reduce our rate of growth, which could adversely effect our earnings and stock price.

We
also have a significant amount of deposits, which are in excess of the maximum FDIC insurance coverage limits. At any time, customers who have uninsured deposits may decide to move
their deposits to institutions which are perceived as safer, sounder, or "too big to fail" or could elect to use other non-deposit funding products, such as repurchase agreements, that would require
the Bank to pay higher interest and to provide securities as collateral for the Bank's repurchase obligation. At December 31, 2015, the Bank had approximately $2.07 billion of deposits
that would be uninsured deposits, or 40% of our total deposits.

While
we believe that our strong earnings, capital position, relationship banking model and reputation as a safe and sound institution mitigate the risk of losing deposits, there can be
no assurance that we will not have to replace a significant amount of deposits with alternative funding sources, such as repurchase agreements, federal funds lines, certificates of deposit, brokered
deposits, other categories of interest bearing deposits and FHLB borrowings, all of which are more expensive than noninterest bearing deposits, and can be more expensive than other categories of
deposits. While we believe that we would be able to maintain adequate liquidity at reasonable cost, the loss of a significant amount of deposits, particularly noninterest bearing deposits, could have
a material adverse effect on our earnings, net interest margin, rate of growth and stock price.

We may face risks with respect to future expansion or acquisition activity.

We selectively seek to expand our banking operations through limited de novo branching
or opportunistic acquisition activities. We cannot be certain that any expansion activity, through de novo branching, acquisition of branches of another
financial institution or a whole institution, or the establishment or acquisition of nonbanking financial service companies, will prove profitable or will increase shareholder value. The success of
any acquisition will depend, in part, on our ability to realize the estimated cost savings and revenue enhancements from combining the businesses of the Company and the target company. Our ability to
realize increases in revenue will depend, in part, on our ability to retain customers and employees, and to capitalize on existing relationships for the provision of additional products and services.
If our estimates turn out to be incorrect or we are not able to successfully combine companies, the anticipated cost savings and increased revenues may not be realized fully or at all, or may take
longer to realize than expected. It is possible that the integration process could result in the loss of key employees, the disruption of each company's ongoing
business or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures and policies that adversely affect our ability to maintain relationships with clients and employees or to achieve the anticipated
benefits of the merger. As with any combination of banking institutions, there also may be disruptions that cause us to lose customers or cause customers to withdraw their deposits from our bank.
Customers may not readily accept changes to their banking arrangements that we make as part of or following an acquisition. Additionally, the value of an acquisition to the Company is dependent on our
ability to successfully identify and estimate the magnitude of any asset quality issues of acquired companies.

Our concentrations of loans may create a greater risk of loan defaults and losses.

A substantial portion of our loans are secured by real estate in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area and substantially all of our
loans are to borrowers in that area. We also have a significant amount of real estate construction loans and land related loans for residential and commercial developments. At December 31,
2015, 79% of our loans were secured by real estate, primarily commercial real estate. Management believes that the commercial real estate concentration risk is mitigated by diversification among the
types and characteristics of real estate collateral properties, sound underwriting practices, and ongoing portfolio monitoring and market analysis. Of these loans, $900.9 million, or 18% of
portfolio loans, were construction and land development loans. An additional $1.05 billion, or 21% of portfolio loans, were commercial and industrial loans, which are generally not secured by
real estate. The repayment of these loans often depends on the successful operation of a business or the sale or development of the underlying property and, as a result, is more likely to be adversely
affected by adverse conditions in the real estate market or the economy in general. While we believe that our loan portfolio is well diversified in terms of borrowers and industries, these
concentrations expose us to the risk that adverse developments in the real estate market, or in the general economic conditions in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, could increase the levels of
nonperforming loans and charge-offs, and reduce loan demand. In that event, we would likely experience lower earnings or losses. Additionally, if, for any reason, economic conditions in our market
area deteriorate, or there is significant volatility or weakness in the economy or any significant sector of the area's economy, our ability to develop our business relationships may be diminished,
the

quality
and collectability of our loans may be adversely affected, the value of collateral may decline and loan demand may be reduced.

Commercial,
commercial real estate and construction loans tend to have larger balances than single family mortgages loans and other consumer loans. Because the loan portfolio contains a
significant number of commercial and commercial real estate and construction loans with relatively large balances, the deterioration of one or a few of these loans may cause a significant increase in
nonperforming
assets. An increase in nonperforming loans could result in: a loss of earnings from these loans, an increase in the provision for loan losses, or an increase in loan charge-offs, which could have an
adverse impact on our results of operations and financial condition.

Additionally,
through ECV, we provide subordinated financing for the acquisition, development and construction of real estate projects, the primary financing for which may be provided by
the Bank. These subordinated financings and the business of ECV will generally entail a higher risk profile (including lower lien priority and higher loan to value ratios) than loans made by the Bank.
A portion of the amount, which the Company expects to receive for such loans, may be payments based on the success, sale or completion of the underlying project, and as such the income of the Company
may be more volatile from period to period, based on the status of such projects.

Our concentrations of loans may require us to maintain higher levels of capital.

Under guidance adopted by the federal banking agencies, banks which have concentrations in construction, land development or commercial
real estate loans (other than loans for majority owner occupied properties) would be expected to maintain higher levels of risk management and, potentially, higher levels of capital. Although not
currently anticipated, we may be required to maintain higher levels of capital than we would otherwise be expected to maintain as a result of our levels of construction, development and commercial
real estate loans, which may require us to obtain additional capital sooner than we would otherwise seek it, which may reduce shareholder returns.

Our Residential Lending department may not continue to provide us with significant noninterest
income.

In 2015, the Bank originated $911 million and sold $907 million of residential mortgage loans to investors, as compared
to $572 million originated and $570 million sold to investors in 2014. The residential mortgage business is highly competitive, and highly susceptible to changes in market interest
rates, consumer confidence levels, employment statistics, the capacity and willingness of secondary market purchasers to acquire and hold or securitize loans, and other factors beyond our control.
Additionally, in many respects, the mortgage origination business is relationship based, and dependent on the services of individual mortgage loan officers. The loss of services of one or more loan
officers could have the effect of reducing the level of our mortgage production, or the rate of growth of production. As a result of these factors we cannot be certain that we will be able to continue
to maintain or increase the volume or percentage of revenue or net income produced by the residential mortgage business.

Our financial condition, earnings and asset quality could be adversely affected if we are required
to repurchase loans originated for sale by our Residential Lending department.

The Bank originates residential mortgage loans for sale to secondary market investors, subject to contractually specified and limited
recourse provisions. Because the loans are intended to be originated within investor guidelines, using designated automated underwriting and product specific requirements as part of the loan
application, the loans sold have a limited recourse provision. In general, the Bank may be required to repurchase a previously sold mortgage loan or indemnify the investor if there is non-compliance
with defined loan origination or documentation standards including fraud, negligence, material misstatement in the loan documents or non-compliance with applicable law. In addition, the Bank

may
have an obligation to repurchase a loan if the mortgagor has defaulted early in the loan term. The potential mortgagor early default repurchase period is up to approximately twelve months after
sale of the loan to the investor. The recourse period for fraud, material misstatement, breach of representations and warranties, non-compliance with law, or similar matters could be as long as the
term of the loan. Mortgages subject to recourse are collateralized by single family residential properties, have loan-to-value ratios of 80% or less, or have private mortgage insurance. Our experience
to date has been minimal in the case of loan repurchases due to default, fraud, breach of representations, material misstatement, or legal non-compliance. Should repurchases become a material issue,
our earnings and asset quality could be adversely impacted, which could adversely impact our share price.

Our financial condition, earnings and asset quality could be adversely affected if our consumer
facing operations do not operate in compliance with applicable regulations.

While all aspects of our operations are subject to detailed and complex compliance regimes, those portions of our lending operations
which most directly deal with consumers pose particular challenges given the emphasis on consumer compliance by bank regulators at all levels. While we are not aware of any material issues of
non-compliance, residential mortgage lending raises significant compliance risks resulting from the detailed and complex nature of mortgage lending regulations imposed by federal regulatory agencies,
and the relatively independent operating environment in which mortgage lending officers operate. As a result, despite the education, compliance training, supervision and oversight we exercise in these
areas, individual loan officers intentionally trying to conceal improper activities could result in the Bank being strictly liable for restitution or damages to individual borrowers, and to regulatory
enforcement activity.

Changes in interest rates and other factors beyond our control could have an adverse impact on our
financial performance and results.

Our operating income and net income depend to a great extent on our net interest margin, i.e., the difference between the
interest yields we receive on loans, securities and other interest bearing assets and the interest rates we pay on interest bearing deposits and other liabilities. Net interest margin is affected by
changes in market interest rates, because different types of assets and liabilities may react differently, and at different times, to market interest rate changes. When interest bearing liabilities
mature or re-price more quickly than interest earning assets in a period, an increase in market rates of interest could reduce net interest income. Similarly, when interest earning assets mature or
re-price more quickly than interest bearing liabilities, falling interest rates could reduce net interest income. These rates are highly sensitive to many factors beyond our control, including
competition, general economic conditions and monetary and fiscal policies of various governmental and regulatory authorities, including the Federal Reserve Board.

We
attempt to manage our risk from changes in market interest rates by adjusting the rates, maturity, re-pricing, and balances of the different types of interest earning assets and
interest bearing liabilities, but interest rate risk management techniques are not exact. As a result, a rapid increase or decrease in interest rates could have an adverse effect on our net interest
margin and results of operations. At December 31, 2015, our cumulative net asset sensitive twelve month gap position was +14% of total assets, which includes variable and adjustable rate loans
currently at their floor rates. As such, we expect modest decreases of approximately minus 0.3% and minus 1.9%, respectively, in projected net interest income and net income over a twelve month period
resulting from a 100 basis point increase in rates, as loans currently at floor rates which are above the calculated contractual rate do not adjust upon a rate increase, and our residential mortgage
origination and sale volume could decline as interest rates increase. The results of our interest rate sensitivity simulation model depend upon a number of assumptions, which may not prove to be
accurate. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully manage our interest rate risk.

Adverse
changes in the real estate market in our market area could also have an adverse effect on our cost of funds and net interest margin, as we have a large amount of noninterest
bearing deposits related to

real
estate sales and development. While we expect that we would be able to replace the liquidity provided by these deposits, the replacement funds would likely be more costly, negatively impacting
earnings.

We may not be able to successfully compete with others for business.

The Washington, D.C. metropolitan area in which we operate is considered highly attractive from an economic and demographic viewpoint,
and is a highly competitive banking market. We compete for loans, deposits, and investment dollars with numerous regional and national banks, online divisions of out-of-market banks, and other
community banking institutions, as well as other kinds of financial institutions and enterprises, such as securities firms, insurance companies, savings associations, credit unions, mortgage brokers,
and private lenders. Many competitors have substantially greater resources than us, and some operate under less stringent regulatory environments. The differences in resources and regulations may make
it harder for us to compete profitably, reduce the rates that we can earn on loans and investments, increase the rates we must offer on deposits and other funds, and adversely affect our overall
financial condition and earnings.

The
Bank has been very successful in developing new customer relationships. These new relationships have resulted in significant increases in both loans and deposits, and have
contributed to increased earnings. Going forward, should competitive pressures increase, we are subject to the risk that we may not be able to retain the loans and deposits produced by these new
relationships. While we believe that our relationship banking model will enable us to keep a significant percentage of these new relationships, there can be no assurance that we will be able to do so,
that we would be able to maintain favorable pricing, margins and asset quality, or that we will be able to grow at the same rate we did when alternative financing was not widely available.

Government regulation will significantly affect the Bank's business, and may result in higher costs
and lower shareholder returns.

The banking industry is heavily regulated. Banking regulations are primarily intended to protect the federal deposit insurance fund and
depositors, not shareholders. The Company and Bank are regulated and supervised by the Maryland Department of Financial Regulation, the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC. The Bank is also subject to
regulations promulgated by the CFPB. The burden imposed by federal and state regulations puts banks at a competitive disadvantage compared to less regulated competitors. Changes in the laws,
regulations and regulatory practices affecting the banking industry may increase our costs of doing business or otherwise adversely affect us and create competitive advantages for others. Regulations
affecting banks and financial services companies undergo continuous change, and we cannot predict the ultimate effect of these changes, which could have a material adverse effect on our profitability
or financial condition. Federal economic and monetary policy may also affect our ability to attract deposits and other funding sources, make loans and investments, and achieve satisfactory interest
spreads.

New or changed legislation or regulation and regulatory initiatives could subject us to increased
regulation, increase our costs of doing business and adversely affect us.

Changes in federal and state legislation and regulation may affect our operations. New and modified regulation, such as the Dodd-Frank
Act and Basel III, may have unforeseen or unintended consequences on our industry. The Dodd-Frank Act implemented, and is expected to further implement, significant changes to the U.S. financial
system, including new regulatory agencies (such as the FSOC to oversee systemic risk and the CFPB to develop and enforce rules for consumer financial products), changes in retail banking regulations,
and changes to deposit insurance assessments. Additionally, the Basel III Rule has revised risk-based and leverage capital requirements and also limits capital distributions and certain discretionary
bonuses if a banking organization does not hold a "capital conservation buffer." This additional regulation increases our compliance costs and may otherwise adversely affects our operations. The
potential also exists for additional federal or state laws or regulations, or changes in policy or

interpretations,
affecting many of our operations, including capital levels, lending and funding practices, insurance assessments, and liquidity standards. The effect of any such changes and their
interpretation and application by regulatory authorities cannot be predicted, may increase the Company's cost of doing business and otherwise affect our operations, may significantly affect the
markets in which the Company does business, and could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

In
addition, government responses to the condition of the global financial markets and the banking industry has, among other things, increased our costs and may further increase our
costs for items such as federal deposit insurance. The FDIC insures deposits at FDIC-insured institutions, such as the Bank, up to applicable limits. The FDIC charges the insured financial
institutions premiums to maintain the Deposit Insurance Fund at a certain level. Increases in deposit insurance premiums to increase the coverage ratio to required levels, to meet revised rules to
measure risk or to pay depositors of additional failed institutions could adversely affect the Company's net income.

While
the full impact of the Dodd-Frank Act and the CFPB rulemakings cannot be assessed until all implementing regulations are released, become effective and are interpreted by
regulators and the courts, the Dodd-Frank Act's extensive requirements have had to date a significant effect on the financial markets, and may affect the availability or terms of financing from our
lender counterparties and the availability or terms of mortgage-backed securities, both of which may have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. The CFPB's continued
rule making is likely to result in increased compliance costs and fees, along with possible restrictions on our operations, any of which may have a material adverse effect on our operating results and
financial condition.

Our customers and businesses in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area in general, may be adversely
impacted as a result of changes in government spending.

The Washington, D.C. metropolitan area is characterized by a significant number of businesses that are federal government contractors
or subcontractors, or which depend on such businesses for a significant portion of their revenues. While the Company does not have a significant level of loans to federal government contractors or
their subcontractors, the impact of a decline in federal government spending, a reallocation of government spending to different industries or different areas of the country, or a delay in payments to
such contractors, could have a ripple effect. Temporary layoffs, salary reductions or furloughs of government employees or government contractors could have adverse impacts on other businesses in the
Company's market and the general economy of the greater Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, and may indirectly lead to a loss of revenues by the Company's customers, including vendors and lessors to
the federal government and government contractors or to their employees, as well as a wide variety of commercial and retail businesses. Accordingly, such potential federal government activities could
lead to increases in past due loans, nonperforming loans, loan loss reserves, and charge-offs, and a decline in liquidity.

We rely upon independent appraisals to determine the value of the real estate, which secures a
significant portion of our loans, and the values indicated by such appraisals may not be realizable if we are forced to foreclose upon such loans.

A significant portion of our loan portfolio consists of loans secured by real estate. We rely upon independent appraisers to estimate
the value of such real estate. Appraisals are only estimates of value and the independent appraisers may make mistakes of fact or judgment, which adversely affect the reliability of their appraisals.
In addition, events occurring after the initial appraisal may cause the value of the real estate to increase or decrease. As a result of any of these factors, the real estate securing some of our
loans may be more or less valuable than anticipated at the time the loans were made. If a default occurs on a loan secured by real estate that is less valuable than originally estimated, we may not be
able to recover the outstanding balance of the loan and will suffer a loss.

We are exposed to risk of environmental liabilities with respect to properties to which we take
title.

In the course of our business we lend against, and may foreclose and take title to, real estate, potentially becoming subject to
environmental liabilities associated with the properties. We may be held liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation and cleanup costs or we
may be required to investigate or clean up hazardous or toxic substances or chemical releases at a property. Costs associated with investigation or remediation activities can be substantial. If the
Bank is the lender to, or owner or former owner of, a contaminated site, it may be subject to common law claims by third parties based on damages and costs resulting from environmental contamination
emanating from the property. These costs and claims could adversely affect our business.

Our operations rely on certain external vendors.

Our business is dependent on the use of outside service providers that support our day-to-day operations including data processing and
electronic communications. Our operations are exposed to risk that a service provider may not perform in accordance with established performance standards required in our agreements for any number of
reasons including equipment or network failure, a change in their senior management, their financial condition, their product line or mix and how they support existing customers, or a simple change in
their strategic focus. While we have comprehensive policies and procedures in place to mitigate risk at all phases of service provider management from selection, to performance monitoring and
renewals, the failure of a service provider to perform in accordance with contractual agreements could be disruptive to our business, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial
conditions and results of our operations.

A breach of information security or cyber-related threats could negatively affect our earnings.

Increasingly, we depend upon data processing, communication and information exchange on a variety of computing platforms and networks,
and over the Internet from internal sources and external, third party vendors. While to date we have not suffered significant financial losses due to cyber-attacks or other cyber incidents, we cannot
guarantee all our systems are free from vulnerability to attack, despite safeguards we and our vendors have instituted. In addition, disruptions to our vendors' systems may arise from events that are
wholly or partially beyond our and our vendors' control (including, for example, computer viruses or electrical or telecommunications outages). If information security is breached, despite the
controls we and our third-party vendors have instituted, information can be lost or misappropriated, resulting in financial losses or costs to us or damages to others. These costs or losses could
materially exceed the amount of insurance coverage, if any, which would adversely affect our earnings. In addition, our reputation could be damaged which
could result in loss of customers, greater difficulty in attracting new customers, or an adverse effect on the value of our common stock.

All properties out of which the Company operates are leased properties. As of December 31, 2015, the Company and its
subsidiaries operated out of 35 leased facilities; 21 of which are leased for branch offices in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area: seven in Montgomery County, Maryland; nine located in Northern
Virginia; and five in the District of Columbia.

From time to time the Company and its subsidiaries are participants in various legal proceedings incidental to their business. In the
opinion of management, the liabilities (if any) resulting from such legal proceedings will not have a material effect on the financial position of the Company.

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF COMMON EQUITY

Market for Common Stock. The Company's common stock is listed for trading on the NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol "EGBN." Over the
twelve month
period ended December 31, 2015, the average daily trading volume amounted to approximately 128,583 shares, an increase from approximately 82,382 shares over the twelve month period ended
December 31, 2014. No assurance can be given that a more active trading market will develop or can be maintained. The following table sets forth the high and low sale prices for the common
stock during each calendar quarter during the last two fiscal years. No cash dividends for common shareholders were declared during such periods. As of February 24, 2016, there were 33,551,237
shares of common stock outstanding, held by approximately 944 shareholders of record. Based on the most recent mailings, the Company believes beneficial shareholders number approximately 13,743.

2015

2014

Quarter

High

Low

High

Low

First

$

38.98

$

31.78

$

37.00

$

29.24

Second

$

45.46

$

35.51

$

36.99

$

30.22

Third

$

47.03

$

39.28

$

35.48

$

31.61

Fourth

$

55.56

$

43.97

$

36.70

$

30.94

Dividends. The Company does not currently pay a cash dividend on its common stock.

The
payment of a cash dividend on common stock will depend largely upon the ability of the Bank, the Company's principal operating business, to declare and pay dividends to the Company.
Payment of dividends on the common stock will also depend upon the Bank's earnings, financial condition, and need for funds, as well as governmental policies and regulations applicable to the Company
and the Bank.

Regulations
of the Federal Reserve Board and Maryland law place limits on the amount of dividends the Bank may pay to the Company without prior approval. Prior regulatory approval is
required to pay dividends which exceed the Bank's net profits for the current year plus its retained net profits for the preceding two calendar years, less required transfers to surplus. Under
Maryland law, dividends may only be paid out of retained earnings. State and federal bank regulatory agencies also have authority to prohibit a bank from paying dividends if such payment is deemed to
be an unsafe or unsound practice, and the Federal Reserve Board has the same authority over bank holding companies. At December 31, 2015 the Bank could pay dividends to the Company to the
extent of its earnings so long as it maintained required capital ratios.

The
Federal Reserve Board has established requirements with respect to the maintenance of appropriate levels of capital by registered bank holding companies. Compliance with such
standards, as presently in effect, or as they may be amended from time to time, could possibly limit the amount of dividends that the Company may pay in the future. In 1985, the Federal Reserve Board
issued a policy statement on the payment of cash dividends by bank holding companies. In the statement, the Federal Reserve Board expressed its view that a holding company experiencing earnings
weaknesses should not pay cash dividends exceeding its net income, or which could only be funded in ways that weaken the holding company's financial health, such as by borrowing. As a depository
institution, the deposits of which are insured by the FDIC, the Bank may not pay dividends or distribute any of its capital assets while it remains in default on any assessment due the FDIC. The Bank
currently is not in default under any of its obligations to the FDIC.

Issuer Repurchase of Common Stock. No shares of the Company's common stock were repurchased by or on behalf of the Company during 2015
or 2014.

See
Item 12Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters for "Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity
Compensation Plans."

Stock Price Performance. The following table compares the cumulative total return on a hypothetical investment of $100 in the Company's
common stock
on December 31, 2010 through December 31, 2015, with the hypothetical cumulative total return on the NASDAQ Stock Market Index (U.S. Companies) and the NASDAQ Bank Index for the
comparable period, including reinvestment of dividends.

The following table shows selected historical consolidated financial data for the Company. It should be read in conjunction with
Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations at page 39 and the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto included elsewhere in this report.

Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures

The information set forth below contains certain financial information determined by methods other than in accordance with GAAP. These
non-GAAP financial measures are "tangible common equity," "tangible book value per common share," "efficiency ratio (adjusted for merger expenses)," and "return on average common equity." Management
uses these non-GAAP measures in its analysis of our performance because it believes these measures are material and will be used as a measure of our performance by investors.

These
disclosures should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for results determined in accordance with GAAP, and are not necessarily comparable to non-GAAP performance
measures which may be presented by other bank holding companies. Management compensates for these limitations by providing detailed reconciliations between GAAP information and the non-GAAP financial
measures. A reconciliation table is set forth below following the selected historical consolidated financial data.

Tangible
common equity, a non-GAAP financial measure, is defined as total common shareholders' equity reduced by goodwill and other intangible assets.

(2)

The
reported figure includes the effect of $4.7 million of merger related expenses ($3.5 million net of tax) for the year ended
December 31, 2014. As the magnitude of the merger expenses distorts the operational results of the Company, we present in the GAAP reconciliation below and in the Management's Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations certain performance ratios excluding the effect of the merger expenses during the year ended December 31, 2014. We believe this
information is important to enable shareholders and other interested parties to assess the core operational performance of the Company.

(3)

Presented
giving retroactive effect to the 10% stock dividend paid on the common stock on June 14, 2013.

(4)

Tangible
book value per common share, a non-GAAP financial measure, is defined as tangible common shareholders' equity divided by total common shares
outstanding.

(5)

Computed
by dividing noninterest expense by the sum of net interest income and noninterest income.

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion provides information about the results of operations, financial condition, liquidity, and capital resources of
the Company. The Company's primary subsidiary is the Bank, and the Company's other direct and indirect operating subsidiaries are Bethesda Leasing, LLC, Eagle Insurance Services, LLC,
and ECV. This discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the audited Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto, appearing elsewhere in this report.

Caution About Forward Looking Statements. This report contains forward looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the
Securities
Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). These forward looking statements represent plans,
estimates, objectives, goals, guidelines, expectations, intentions, projections and statements of our beliefs concerning future events, business plans, objectives, expected operating results and the
assumptions upon which those statements are based. Forward looking statements include without limitation, any statement that may predict, forecast, indicate or imply future results, performance or
achievements, and are typically identified with words such as "may," "could," "should," "will," "would," "believe," "anticipate," "estimate," "expect," "intend," "plan," or words or phases of similar
meaning. These forward looking statements are based largely on our expectations and are subject to a number of known and unknown risks and uncertainties that are subject to change based on factors
which are, in many instances, beyond our control. Actual results, performance or achievements could differ materially from those contemplated, expressed, or implied by the forward looking statements.

The
following factors, among others, could cause our financial performance to differ materially from that expressed in such forward looking
statements:



The strength of the United States economy, in general, and the strength of the local economies in which we conduct operations;



Geopolitical conditions, including acts or threats of terrorism, actions taken by the United States or other governments in response
to acts or threats of terrorism and/or military conflicts, which could impact business and economic conditions in the United States and abroad;

The timely development of competitive new products and services and the acceptance of these products and services by new and existing
customers;



Results of examinations of us by our regulators, including the possibility that our regulators may, among other things, require us to
increase our allowance for credit losses, to write-down assets or to hold more capital;



Changing bank regulatory conditions, policies or programs, whether arising as new legislation or regulatory initiatives, that could
lead to restrictions on activities of banks generally, or our subsidiary bank in particular, more restrictive regulatory capital requirements, increased costs, including deposit insurance premiums,
regulation or prohibition of certain income producing activities or changes in the secondary market for loans and other products;



The willingness of customers to substitute competitors' products and services for our products and services;



The impact of changes in financial services policies, laws and regulations, including laws, regulations and policies concerning taxes,
banking, securities and insurance, and the application thereof by regulatory bodies;

The effect of changes in accounting policies and practices, as may be adopted from time-to-time by bank regulatory agencies, the
Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board or the Financial Accounting Standards Board;



Technological and social media changes;



Cybersecurity breaches and threats that cause the Bank to sustain financial losses;



The effect of acquisitions we may make, including, without limitation, the failure to achieve the expected revenue growth and/or
expense savings from such acquisitions;



The growth and profitability of noninterest or fee income being less than expected;



Changes in the level of our nonperforming assets and charge-offs;



Changes in consumer spending and savings habits;



Unanticipated regulatory or judicial proceedings; and



The factors discussed under the caption "Risk Factors" in this report.

If
one or more of the factors affecting our forward looking information and statements proves incorrect, then our actual results, performance or achievements could differ materially from
those expressed in, or implied by, forward looking information and statements contained in this report. You should not place undue reliance on our forward looking information and statements. We will
not update the forward looking statements to reflect actual results or changes in the factors affecting the forward looking statements.

GENERAL

The Company is a growth-oriented, one-bank holding company headquartered in Bethesda, Maryland, which is currently celebrating seventeen years of successful
operations. The Company provides general commercial and consumer banking services through the Bank, its wholly owned banking subsidiary, a Maryland chartered bank which is a member of the Federal
Reserve System. The Company was organized in October 1997, to be the holding company for the Bank. The Bank was organized in 1998 as an independent, community oriented, full service banking
alternative to the super regional financial institutions, which dominate the Company's primary market area. The Company's philosophy is to provide superior, personalized service to its customers. The
Company focuses on relationship banking, providing each customer with a number of services and becoming familiar with and addressing customer needs in a proactive, personalized fashion. The Bank
currently has a total of twenty one branch offices, including nine in Northern Virginia, seven in Montgomery County, Maryland, and five in Washington, D.C.

The
Bank offers a broad range of commercial banking services to its business and professional clients as well as full service consumer banking services to individuals living and/or
working primarily in the Bank's market area. The Bank emphasizes providing commercial banking services to sole proprietors, small and medium-sized businesses, non-profit organizations and
associations, and investors living and working in and near the primary service area. These services include the usual deposit functions of commercial banks, including business and personal checking
accounts, NOW accounts and money market and savings accounts, business, construction, and commercial loans, residential mortgages and consumer loans, and cash management services. The Bank is also
active in the origination and sale of residential mortgage loans and the origination of SBA loans. The residential mortgage loans are originated for sale to third-party investors, generally large
mortgage and banking companies, under best efforts and mandatory delivery commitments with the investors to purchase the loans subject to compliance with pre-established criteria. The Bank generally
sells the guaranteed portion of the SBA loans in a transaction apart from the loan origination generating noninterest income from the gains on
sale, as well as servicing income on the portion participated. Bethesda Leasing, LLC, a subsidiary of the Bank, holds title to and manages other

real
estate owned ("OREO") assets. Eagle Insurance Services, LLC, a subsidiary of the Bank, offers access to insurance products and services through a referral program with a third party
insurance broker. Additionally, the Bank offers investment advisory services through referral programs with two third parties. ECV, a subsidiary of the Company, provides subordinated financing for the
acquisition, development and/or construction of real estate projects. ECV lending involves higher levels of risk, together with commensurate expected returns.

Throughout
2015, economic conditions in the U.S. economy remained mixed as monthly reports fluctuated from generally good to weak with sub-par economic and wage growth being a persistent
theme. As 2015 began, expectations were high that the Federal Reserve Board would begin moving short-term interest rates higher but that move did not occur until the final meeting in December. Actual
GDP growth for 2015 in the U.S. was below expectations, with the final quarter of 2015 registering just 0.7% growth. Worldwide GDP growth was also generally weak with the European Central Bank ("ECB")
committing to further monetary stimulus, and discussions of negative interest rates. Additionally, growth in China declined, which put pressure on developing countries growth, resulting in lower
commodity prices, including oil, which prices were very dependent on the strength of the Chinese economy. The U.S. official unemployment rate declined by year-end 2015 to 4.9%. However, job growth,
which occurred monthly, was impacted significantly by lower paying jobs, more part-time employment and a lower job participation level. The lack of solid full time job growth and wages weighed heavily
on Federal Reserve Board monetary policy, which continued short-term interest rates at near zero levels until its December 2015 meeting, when the federal funds target interest rate was increased by 25
basis points, the first such rate hike by the Federal Reserve's Open Market Committee ("FOMC") in nine years.

Longer-term
U.S. interest rates averaged lower in 2015, with the ten year U.S. Treasury rate averaging 2.14% in 2015 versus 2.54% in 2014. The yield curve flattened (two year versus ten
year U.S. Treasury rates) during 2015 as inflationary pressures subsided and the prospect of the FOMC raising short term rates increased, which did not happen until late in 2015. Lower long-term
interest rates were a function of both a flight to quality in U.S. Treasury securities, as persistent weaknesses continued in ECB economies generally, along with geopolitical risks, combined with very
low inflation levels, most notably energy prices. Arguably, the most significant economic factor in 2015, was substantially lower energy (oil and natural gas) prices brought about by enhanced
production in the U.S. and worldwide, creating a huge oversupply situation. The good news was lower U.S. consumer gasoline prices. The bad news was significant stress on the U.S. energy sector's jobs
and financial position and results.

As
the ten year U.S. Treasury rate remained in a range of 2.00%-2.25% for most of 2015, the volume of residential mortgage lending was generally favorable throughout the year. Overall,
real estate values
were stable to increasing in 2015 as interest rates remained low and job growth and personal income levels rose modestly. Political gridlock continued in Washington, D.C. over concerns of public debt
and deficits, tax policy and spending levels, although a bill to fund the federal government through September 2016 was reached in late 2015. Uncertainty concerning public policy kept private
investment weak throughout 2015 and average liquidity in the overall economy remained high.

Even
considering the impact of lower federal government spending in 2015, the Company's primary market, the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, has been relatively less impacted by
recessionary forces than other parts of the country, due to good growth in the private sector. Private sector growth was attributable in part to a diverse economy including a large healthcare
component, substantial business services, and a highly educated work force.

During
2015, the Company enhanced its marketplace positioning by remaining proactive in growing client relationships and expanding its presence in the Northern Virginia sub-market with
the acquisition of Virginia Heritage completed October 31, 2014. The Company has had the financial resources to meet, and has remained committed to meeting, the credit needs of its community,
resulting in substantial growth in the Bank's loan portfolio during 2015. Furthermore, the Company's capital position was enhanced in 2015

by
very strong and consistent earnings and a successful common stock offering in March 2015. The Company believes its strategies of remaining growth-oriented, retaining a talented staff and
maintaining focus on seeking quality lending and deposit relationships has proven successful and is evidenced in its financial and performance ratios. Additionally, the Company believes such focus and
strategy of relationship building has fostered future growth opportunities, as the Company's reputation in the marketplace has continued to grow. At December 31, 2015, the Company had total
assets of approximately $6.08 billion, total loans of $5.00 billion, total deposits of $5.16 billion and twenty one branches in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area.

Operating
in the economic environment of 2015, the Bank was able to produce above average growth as compared to local peer banks in both deposits and loans. Additionally, the Bank was
able to grow its net interest spread earnings substantially, maintain an above average net interest margin, retain a solid position regarding asset quality, and generate enhanced operating leverage
due in part from the Merger, as well as to its seasoned and professional staff. The Company increased its net income in each quarter of 2015, continuing a trend of consecutive quarterly increases
dating to the first quarter of 2009.

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

The Company's Consolidated Financial Statements are prepared in accordance with GAAP and follow general practices within the banking industry. Application of
these principles requires management to make estimates, assumptions, and judgments that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. These estimates, assumptions and
judgments are based on information available as of the date of the Consolidated Financial Statements; accordingly, as this information changes, the Consolidated Financial Statements could reflect
different estimates, assumptions, and judgments. Certain policies inherently have a greater reliance on the use of estimates, assumptions and judgments and, as such, have a greater possibility of
producing results that could be materially different than originally reported. Estimates, assumptions, and judgments are necessary when assets and liabilities are required to be recorded at fair
value, when a decline in the value of an asset not carried on the financial statements at fair value warrants an impairment write-down or a valuation reserve to be established, or when an asset or
liability needs to be recorded contingent upon a future event. Carrying assets and liabilities at fair value inherently results in more financial statement volatility.

The
fair values and the information used to record valuation adjustments for investment securities available-for-sale are based either on quoted market prices or are provided by other
third-party sources, when available. The Company's investment portfolio is categorized as available-for-sale with unrealized gains and losses net of income tax being a component of shareholders'
equity and accumulated other comprehensive income.

Business
combinations are accounted for by applying the acquisition method in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification ("ASC") Topic 805, "Business
Combinations." Under the acquisition method, identifiable assets acquired and liabilities assumed, and any non-controlling interest in the acquiree at the acquisition date are
measured at their fair values as of that date, and are recognized separately from goodwill. Results of operations of the acquired entities are included in the consolidated statement of income from the
date of acquisition. Adjustments to fair value for credit and current interest rate considerations at the date of acquisition are subsequently amortized to interest income and interest expense based
on the remaining life of the asset or liability. Ongoing assessments of fair value are made at each balance sheet date.

The
allowance for credit losses is an estimate of the losses that may be sustained in our loan portfolio. The allowance is based on two principles of accounting: (a) ASC Topic
450, "Contingencies," which requires that losses be accrued when they are probable of occurring and are estimable and (b) ASC Topic 310, "Receivables," which requires that losses be accrued when it is probable that the Company will not collect all principal and interest payments according
to the contractual terms of the loan. The loss, if

any,
can be determined by the difference between the loan balance and the value of collateral, the present value of expected future cash flows, or values observable in the secondary markets.

Three
components comprise our allowance for credit losses: a specific allowance, a formula allowance and a nonspecific or environmental factors allowance. Each component is determined
based on estimates that can and do change when actual events occur.

The
specific allowance allocates a reserve to identified impaired loans. Impaired loans are assigned specific reserves based on an impairment analysis. Under ASC Topic 310, "Receivables," a loan for
which reserves are individually allocated may show deficiencies in the borrower's overall financial condition, payment record,
support available from financial guarantors and for the fair market value of collateral. When a loan is identified as impaired, a specific reserve is established based on the Company's assessment of
the loss that may be associated with the individual loan.

The
formula allowance is used to estimate the loss on internally risk rated loans, exclusive of those identified as requiring specific reserves. The portfolio of unimpaired loans is
stratified by loan type and risk assessment. Allowance factors relate to the type of loan and level of the internal risk rating, with loans exhibiting higher risk and loss experience receiving a
higher allowance factor.

The
environmental allowance is also used to estimate the loss associated with pools of non-classified loans. These non-classified loans are also stratified by loan type, and
environmental allowance factors are assigned by management based upon a number of conditions, including delinquencies, loss history, changes in lending policy and procedures, changes in business and
economic conditions, changes in the nature and volume of the portfolio, management expertise, concentrations within the portfolio, quality of internal and external loan review systems, competition,
and legal and regulatory requirements.

The
allowance captures losses inherent in the loan portfolio, which have not yet been recognized. Allowance factors and the overall size of the allowance may change from period to period
based upon management's assessment of the above described factors, the relative weights given to each factor, and portfolio composition.

Management
has significant discretion in making the judgments inherent in the determination of the provision and allowance for credit losses, including in connection with the valuation
of collateral, a borrower's prospects of repayment, and in establishing allowance factors on the formula and
environmental components of the allowance. The establishment of allowance factors involves a continuing evaluation, based on management's ongoing assessment of the global factors discussed above and
their impact on the portfolio. The allowance factors may change from period to period, resulting in an increase or decrease in the amount of the provision or allowance, based upon the same volume and
classification of loans. Changes in allowance factors can have a direct impact on the amount of the provision, and a related after tax effect on net income. Errors in management's perception and
assessment of the global factors and their impact on the portfolio could result in the allowance not being adequate to cover losses in the portfolio, and may result in additional provisions or
charge-offs. Alternatively, errors in management's perception and assessment of the global factors and their impact on the portfolio could result in the allowance being in excess of amounts necessary
to cover losses in the portfolio, and may result in lower provisions in the future. For additional information regarding the provision for credit losses, refer to the discussion under the caption
"Provision for Credit Losses" below.

Goodwill
represents the excess of the cost of an acquisition over the fair value of the net assets acquired. Other intangible assets represent purchased assets that lack physical
substance but can be distinguished from goodwill because of contractual or other legal rights. Intangible assets that have finite lives, such as core deposit intangibles, are amortized over their
estimated useful lives and subject to periodic impairment testing. Intangible assets (other than goodwill) are amortized to expense using accelerated or straight-line methods over their respective
estimated useful lives.

Goodwill
and other intangibles are subject to impairment testing at the reporting unit level, which must be conducted at least annually. The Company performs impairment testing during
the fourth quarter of each year or when events or changes in circumstances indicate the assets might be impaired.

The
Company performs a qualitative assessment to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If, after
assessing updated qualitative factors, the Company determines it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, it does not have to perform the
two-step goodwill impairment test. Determining the fair value of a reporting unit under the first step of the goodwill impairment test and determining the fair value of individual assets and
liabilities of a reporting unit under the second step of the goodwill impairment test are judgmental and often involve the use of significant estimates and assumptions. Similarly, estimates and
assumptions are used in determining the fair value of other intangible assets. Estimates of fair value are primarily determined using discounted cash flows, market comparisons and recent transactions.
These approaches use significant estimates and assumptions including projected future cash flows, discount rates reflecting the market rate of return, projected growth rates and determination and
evaluation of appropriate market comparables. Based on the results of quantitative assessments of all reporting units, the Company concluded that no impairment existed at December 31, 2015.
However, future events could cause the Company to conclude that goodwill or other intangibles have become impaired, which would result in recording an impairment
loss. Any resulting impairment loss could have a material adverse impact on the Company's financial condition and results of operations.

The
Company follows the provisions of ASC Topic 718, "Compensation," which requires the expense recognition for the fair value of share
based compensation awards, such as stock options, restricted stock awards, and performance based shares. This standard allows management to establish modeling assumptions as to expected stock price
volatility, option terms, forfeiture rates and dividend rates which directly impact estimated fair value. The accounting standard also allows for the use of alternative option pricing models which may
impact fair value as determined. The Company's practice is to utilize reasonable and supportable assumptions.

Interest
rate swap derivatives designated as qualified cash flow hedges are tested for hedge effectiveness on a quarterly basis. Assessments are made at the inception of the hedge and on
a recurring basis to determine whether the derivative used in the hedging transaction has been and is expected to continue to be highly effective in offsetting changes in fair values or cash flows of
the hedged item. A statistical regression analysis is performed to measure the effectiveness.

If,
based on the assessment, a derivative is not expected to be a highly effective hedge or it has ceased to be a highly effective hedge, hedge accounting is discontinued as of the
quarter the hedge is not highly effective. As the statistical regression analysis requires the use of estimates regarding the amount and timing of future cash flows which are sensitive to significant
changes in future periods based on changes in market rates; we consider this a critical accounting estimate.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Overview

Due to the Merger completed in 2014, the Company incurred various merger-related expenses in 2014, which make it difficult for readers
to analyze the Company's core operating earnings. For comparison purposes, the Company provides parenthetically in the discussion below the operating amounts and ratios which it feels are more useful
to the reader. For a
reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to the GAAP equivalents, please refer to the Selected Financial Data appearing at Item 6 of this report.

For
the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company's net income was $84.2 million, a 55% increase (46% on an operating basis) over the $54.3 million
($57.7 million on an operating basis) for the year ended

December 31,
2014. Net income available to common shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $83.6 million, as compared to $53.6 million ($57.1 million on
an operating basis) for the same period in 2014, a 56% increase (46% on an operating basis).

Net
income available to common shareholders in 2015 was $2.54 per basic common share and $2.50 per diluted common share, as compared to $2.01 per basic common share and $1.95 per diluted
common share ($2.14 per basic common share and $2.08 per diluted common share on an operating basis) for 2014, a 26% increase per basic and a 28% increase per diluted common share (19% increase per
basic and 21% per diluted common share on an operating basis).

For
the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company reported a return on average assets ("ROAA") of 1.49% as compared to 1.31% (1.40% on an operating basis) for the year ended
December 31, 2014, while the return on average common equity ("ROACE") was 12.32%, as compared to 13.50% (14.38% on an operating basis) for the year ended December 31, 2014.

The
lower ROACE for the full year 2015 as compared to the 2014 ratio was due to higher capital levels in 2015.

The
Company's earnings are largely dependent on net interest income, the difference between interest income and interest expense, which represented 90% and 91% of total revenue (defined
as net interest income plus noninterest income) for the full year in 2015 and 2014, respectively.

The
net interest margin, which measures the difference between interest income and interest expense (i.e., net interest income) as a percentage of earning assets, decreased 11
basis points from 4.44% for the year ended December 31, 2014 to 4.33% for the year ended December 31, 2015. Average earning asset yields decreased by 8 basis points (4.69% versus 4.77%)
for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the same period in 2014, while the cost of interest bearing liabilities increased by 5 basis
points (to 0.54% from 0.49%). For 2015, in spite of competitive factors and a low interest rate environment, the Company has been able to maintain its loan portfolio yields relatively close to 2014
levels (5.24% versus 5.37%) due to disciplined loan pricing practices. The net interest margin was positively impacted by 6 basis points for the year ended December 31, 2015 as a result of
$3.5 million in amortization of the credit mark adjustment from the Merger.

For
the year ended December 31, 2015, the net interest spread decreased by 13 basis points (to 4.15% from 4.28%) as compared to 2014, due to lower yields on average earning assets
and an increase in the average cost on interest bearing liabilities. The cost of interest bearing liabilities increased in 2015 largely as a result of the full year impact of the issuance of
$70 million of subordinated notes completed in August 2014, and to a higher mix of time deposits resulting from the Merger. Overall, the Company believes its deposit mix and cost of funds
remains favorable. The benefit of noninterest sources funding earning assets increased by 2 basis points to 18 basis points from 16 basis points for the year ended December 31, 2015 and 2014,
respectively, as a result of a favorable mix of noninterest bearing deposits and stockholders' equity.

The
combination of a 13 basis point decrease in the net interest spread and a 2 basis point increase in the value of noninterest sources resulted in the 11 basis point decrease in the
net interest margin for the year ended December 31, 2015 as compared to the same period in 2014.

The
Company believes it effectively managed its net interest margin and net interest income during 2015 as market interest rates (on average) have remained relatively low. This factor
has been significant to overall earnings performance during 2015 as net interest income (at 90%) represents the most significant component of the Company's revenues.

The
provision for credit losses was $14.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 as compared to $10.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2014. The
higher provisioning in the year ended December 31, 2015, as compared to the December 31, 2014, is due to both higher loan growth and higher

net
charge-offs. Net charge-offs of $8.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 represented 0.17% of average loans, excluding loans held for sale, as compared to
$5.7 million or 0.17% of average loans, excluding loans held for sale, for the year ended December 31, 2014.

At
December 31, 2015, the allowance for credit losses represented 1.05% of loans outstanding, as compared to 1.07% at December 31, 2014. The decrease in the allowance for
credit losses as a
percentage of total loans was due to both higher loan growth and lower impaired loan balances. The allowance for credit losses was 398% of nonperforming loans at December 31, 2015, as compared
to 205% at December 31, 2014.

Total
noninterest income for the year ended December 31, 2015 increased to $26.6 million from $18.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, a 45%
increase.

The
efficiency ratio, which measures the ratio of noninterest expense to total revenue, remained favorable at 42.49% for the year ended December 31, 2015 as compared to 50.67%
(48.28% on an operating basis) for the same period in 2014. Total noninterest expenses totaled $110.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, as compared to $99.7 million
($95.0 million on an operating basis) for the year ended December 31, 2014, an 11% increase (17% on an operating basis). As a percentage of average assets, total noninterest expense was
1.97% for the year of 2015 as compared to 2.41% (2.30% on an operating basis) for the same period in 2014.

The
ratio of common equity to total assets increased from 10.46% at December 31, 2014 to 12.15% at December 31, 2015 due to growth from earnings and the public offering of
common stock completed during the first quarter of 2015. As discussed in the "Capital Resources and Adequacy" section, the regulatory capital ratios of the Bank and Company remain above well
capitalized levels.

Net Interest Income and Net Interest Margin

Net interest income is the difference between interest income on earning assets and the cost of funds supporting those assets. Earning
assets are composed primarily of loans, loans held for sale, investment securities, and interest bearing deposits with banks. The cost of funds comprises interest expense on deposits, customer
repurchase agreements and other borrowings, which consist of federal funds purchased, advances from the FHLB and subordinated notes. Noninterest bearing deposits and capital are other components
representing funding sources. Changes in the volume and mix of assets and funding sources, along with the changes in yields earned and rates paid, determine changes in net interest income.

Net
interest income in 2015 was $233.9 million compared to $178.5 million in 2014 and $144.8 million in 2013.

For
the year ended December 31, 2015, net interest income increased 31% over the same period for 2014. Average loans increased $1.23 billion (37%) and average deposits
increased by $1.18 billion (34%). The net interest margin was 4.33% for the year ended December 31, 2015, as compared to 4.44% for
the same period in 2014. The Company has been able to maintain its loan yields in 2015 relatively close to 2014 levels due to disciplined loan pricing practices, and has managed its funding costs
while maintaining a favorable deposit mix; much of which has occurred from sales efforts to increase and deepen client relationships. The Company believes its net interest margin remains favorable.

The
table below presents the average balances and rates of the various categories of the Company's assets and liabilities for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013.
Included in the tables is a measurement of interest rate spread and margin. Interest rate spread is the difference (expressed as a percentage) between the interest rate earned on earning assets less
the interest expense on interest bearing liabilities. While the interest rate spread provides a quick comparison of earnings rates versus cost of funds, management believes that margin provides a
better measurement of performance. Margin includes the effect of noninterest bearing sources in its calculation and is net interest income expressed as a percentage of average earning assets.

Loans
placed on nonaccrual status are included in average balances. Net loan fees and late charges included in interest income on loans totaled
$12.6 million, $11.5 million and $7.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013 respectively.

The rate/volume table below presents the composition of the change in net interest income for the periods indicated, as allocated
between the change in net interest income due to changes in the volume of average earning assets and interest bearing liabilities, and the changes in net interest income due to changes in interest
rates. As the table shows, the increase in net interest income in 2015 as compared to

2014
was primarily a function of an increase in the volume of earning assets. For 2014 over 2013, the change was primarily a function of an increase in the volume of earning assets.

2015 compared with 2014

2014 compared with 2013

(dollars in thousands)

Change Due
to Volume

Change Due
to Rate

Total
Increase
(Decrease)

Change Due
to Volume

Change Due
to Rate

Total
Increase
(Decrease)

Interest earned on

Loans

$

66,165

$

(5,934

)

$

60,231

$

39,476

$

(4,699

)

$

34,777

Loans held for sale

438

(104

)

334

(1,972

)

169

(1,803

)

Investment securities

1,038

(232

)

806

1,186

308

1,494

Interest bearing bank deposits

241

(5

)

236

(179

)

(14

)

(193

)

Federal funds sold

(4

)

4



4

0

4

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Total interest income

67,878

(6,271

)

61,607

38,515

(4,236

)

34,279

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Interest paid on

Interest bearing transaction

93

20

113

46

(166

)

(120

)

Savings and money market

1,526

394

1,920

1,648

(1,148

)

500

Time deposits

2,318

354

2,672

(307

)

(1,049

)

(1,356

)

Customer repurchase agreements

(10

)

(1

)

(11

)

(83

)

(28

)

(111

)

Other borrowings

315

1,134

1,449

1,573

105

1,678

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Total interest expense

4,242

1,901

6,143

2,877

(2,286

)

591

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Net interest income

$

63,636

$

(8,172

)

$

55,464

$

35,638

$

(1,950

)

$

33,688

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Provision for Credit Losses

The provision for credit losses represents the amount of expense charged to current earnings to fund the allowance for credit losses.
The amount of the allowance for credit losses is based on many factors which reflect management's assessment of the risk in the loan portfolio. Those factors include economic conditions and trends,
the value and adequacy of collateral, volume and mix of the portfolio, performance of the portfolio, and internal loan processes of the Company and Bank.

Management
has developed a comprehensive analytical process to monitor the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses. This process and guidelines were developed utilizing, among other
factors, the guidance from federal banking regulatory agencies. The results of this process, in combination with conclusions of the Bank's outside loan review consulting firm, support management's
assessment as to the adequacy of the allowance at the balance sheet date. Please refer to the discussion under the caption "Critical Accounting Policies" for an overview of the methodology management
employs on a quarterly basis to assess the adequacy of the allowance and the provisions charged to expense. Also, refer to the table under "Allowance for Credit Losses" at page 56, which
reflects the comparative charge-offs and recoveries.

The
allowance for credit losses increased $6.6 million as of December 31, 2015 as compared to December 31, 2014, reflecting $14.6 million in provision for
credit losses and $8.0 million in net charge-offs during 2015. The provision for credit losses was $14.6 million for 2015 as compared to $10.9 million in 2014. The higher
provisioning for the year ended December 31, 2015 as compared to the same period in 2014 was due to both higher loan growth and higher net charge-offs. Net charge-offs totaled
$8.0 million (0.17% of average loans, excluding loans held for sale) for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to $5.7 million (0.17% of average loans, excluding loans held
for sale) for the year ended December 31, 2014, a dollar increase of $2.3 million. Net charge-offs for the year ended December 31, 2015 were attributable

primarily
to land development and construction loans ($1.7 million), commercial and industrial loans ($4.5 million), home equity and other consumer ($1.2 million), and income
producing-commercial real estate loans ($625 thousand).

At
December 31, 2015 the allowance for credit losses represented 1.05% of loans outstanding, as compared to 1.07% at December 31, 2014. The decline in the ratio of the
allowance for credit losses to total loans was due to growth in the loan portfolio and lower impaired loan balances. The allowance for credit losses represented 398% of nonperforming loans at
December 31, 2015, as compared to 205% at December 31, 2014.

As
part of its comprehensive loan review process, the Bank's Board of Directors and Loan Committee or Credit Review Committee carefully evaluate loans which are past-due 30 days
or more. The Committees make a thorough assessment of the conditions and circumstances surrounding each delinquent loan. The Bank's loan policy requires that loans be placed on nonaccrual if they are
90 days past-due, unless they are well secured and in the process of collection. Additionally, Credit Administration specifically analyzes the status of development and construction projects,
sales activities and utilization of interest reserves in order to carefully and prudently assess potential increased levels of risk requiring additional reserves.

The
maintenance of a high quality loan portfolio, with an adequate allowance for possible credit losses, will continue to be a primary management objective for the Company.

Noninterest Income

Total noninterest income includes service charges on deposits, gain on sale of loans, gain on sale of investments, income from bank
owned life insurance ("BOLI") and other income.

Total
noninterest income for the year ended December 31, 2015 increased to $26.6 million from $18.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, a 45%
increase. This increase was primarily due to $4.9 million higher gains on the sale of residential mortgage loans and to gains realized on the sale of investment securities of
$2.3 million offset by a $1.1 million loss on the early extinguishment of debt due to the early payoff of FHLB advances. There were $2.3 million of investment securities gains
recorded for the year of 2015, as compared to $22 thousand of investment securities gains for the year of 2014.

For
the year ended December 31, 2015, service charges on deposit accounts increased $491 thousand to $5.4 million from $4.9 million, an increase of 10% over
2014. This increase in service charges for the year ended December 31, 2015 was primarily related to growth in the number of accounts.

Gain
on sale of loans consists of SBA and residential mortgage loans. For the year ended December 31, 2015, gain on sale of loans increased from $6.9 million to
$12.0 million compared to the same period in 2014.

The
Company originates residential mortgage loans and utilizes both "mandatory delivery" and "best efforts" forward loan sale commitments to sell those loans, servicing released. Sales
of these residential mortgage loans yielded gains of $10.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to $5.6 million in the same period in 2014, as refinancing
activity increased beginning in the first quarter of 2015. Loans sold are subject to repurchase in circumstances where documentation is deficient or the underlying loan becomes delinquent or pays off
within a specified period following loan funding and sale. The Bank considers these potential recourse provisions to be a minimal risk, but has established a reserve for possible repurchases. The
reserve amounted to $117 thousand at December 31, 2015 and is included in other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. There were no repurchases due to fraud by the borrower
during the year ended December 31, 2015. The Bank does not originate "sub-prime" loans and has no exposure to that market segment.

The
Company is an originator of SBA loans and its current practice is to sell the guaranteed portion of those loans at a premium. Income from this source was $1.5 million for the
year ended December 31,

2015
compared to $1.3 million for the same period in 2014. Activity in SBA loan sales to secondary markets can vary widely from quarter to quarter.

Other
income totaled $6.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 as compared to $5.2 million for the same period in 2014, an increase of 25%. ATM fees
increased from $1.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, to $1.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, a 19% increase. SBA servicing fees increased from
$260 thousand for the year ended December 31, 2014 to $290 thousand for the year ended December 31, 2015, a 12% increase. Noninterest loan fees increased from
$2.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 to $3.6 million for the same period in 2015, a 30% increase. Noninterest loan fees relate primarily to the collection of
prepayment and commitment fees. Other noninterest fee income was $1.2 million for 2015 compared to $1.0 million for 2014, a 19% increase.

At
December 31, 2015, BOLI amounted to $58.7 million as compared to $56.6 million at December 31, 2014, which reflected an increase in cash surrender values.

Net
investment gains amounted to $2.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to $22 thousand for the year ended December 31, 2014. Net
investment gains were realized in 2015 to take advantage of market conditions, as longer term U.S. Treasury rates declined precipitously in February 2015.

Noninterest Expense

Total noninterest expense consists of salaries and employee benefits, premises and equipment expenses, marketing and advertising, data
processing, legal, accounting and professional fees, FDIC insurance premiums and other expenses.

Total
noninterest expenses totaled $110.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, as compared to $99.7 million ($95.0 million on an operating basis) for
the year ended December 31, 2014, an 11% increase (17% on an operating basis).

Salaries
and employee benefits were $61.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, as compared to $57.3 million for the same period in 2014, an 8% increase.
Cost increases for salaries and benefits for the year ended December 31, 2015 were due primarily to increased staff, merit increases, employee benefit expense increases and higher incentive
compensation. At December 31, 2015, the Company's full time equivalent staff numbered 434, as compared to 427 at December 31, 2014.

Premises
and equipment expenses amounted to $16.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 as compared to $13.3 million for the same period in 2014, a 20%
increase. For the year ended December 31, 2015, premises and equipment expenses were higher due to costs of additional branches and office space acquired in the Merger, to increases in leasing
costs, and to accelerated amortization. For the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company recognized $435 thousand of sublease revenue as compared to $114 thousand for the same
period in 2014. The sublease revenue is a direct offset of premises and equipment expenses.

Marketing
and advertising expenses increased from $2.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 to $2.7 million for 2015, an increase of 38%, primarily due to
costs associated with digital and print advertising and sponsorships.

Data
processing expenses increased from $6.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 to $7.5 million for 2015, an increase of 22%. The increase in expense for
the year ended December 31, 2015 as compared to the same period in 2014 was due to increased accounts and transaction volume primarily arising out of the Merger and to higher network expenses.

Legal,
accounting and professional fees were $3.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, as compared to $3.4 million for 2014, an increase of 8%.

FDIC
insurance premiums increased $821 thousand to $3.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, an increase of 35% compared to 2014 due to higher average asset
growth.

Other
expenses increased to $15.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 from $10.5 million for the same period in 2014, an increase of 49%. The major
components of cost in this category include insurance expenses, deposit fees, director fees, OREO expenses and franchise taxes. The increase for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the
same period in 2014 was primarily due to an increase in costs and valuation adjustments associated with other real estate owned of $2.1 million, an increase in franchise tax of
$506 thousand, and an increase in core deposit intangible amortization of $754 thousand. Cost control remains a significant operating objective of the Company.

Income Tax Expense

The Company recorded income tax expense of $51.0 million in 2015 compared to $32.0 million in 2014, resulting in an
effective tax rate of 37.8% and 37.1%, respectively. The higher effective tax rate for 2015 reflects the relatively lower levels of tax exempt income.

BALANCE SHEET ANALYSIS

Overview

At December 31, 2015, total assets were $6.08 billion, compared to $5.25 billion at December 31, 2014, a
16% increase. Total loans (excluding loans held for sale) were $5.00 billion at December 31, 2015 compared to $4.31 billion at December 31, 2014, a 16% increase. Total
deposits were $5.16 billion at December 31, 2015, compared to deposits of $4.31 billion at December 31, 2014, a 20% increase. Loans held for sale amounted to
$47.5 million at December 31, 2015 as compared to $44.3 million at December 31, 2014, a 7% increase.

The
investment portfolio totaled $487.9 million at December 31, 2015, a 28% increase from the $382.3 million balance at December 31, 2014. Total borrowed
funds (excluding customer repurchase agreements) were $70.0 million at December 31, 2015 as compared to $219.3 million at December 31, 2014, a 68% decrease. The decline in
borrowed funds for the year ended December 31, 2015 as compared to December 31, 2014 was the result of the payoff of all FHLB advances and the $9.3 million in subordinated notes
due 2021.

Total
shareholders' equity at December 31, 2015 decreased 6%, to $738.6 million, compared to $786.1 million at September 30, 2015, and increased 19%, from
$620.8 million, at December 31, 2014. The decline of shareholders' equity from September 30, 2015 reflects the redemption during the fourth quarter of 2015 of all
$71.9 million of the preferred stock issued under the Small Business Lending Fund ("SBLF"), partially offset by earnings during the fourth quarter. The increase in shareholders' equity in 2015
was due to increased retained earnings, the public offering of common stock completed during the first quarter of 2015 (which netted approximately $94.5 million) and the redemption of the SBLF
preferred stock noted above. The ratio of common equity to total assets was 12.15% at December 31, 2015 as compared to 10.46% at December 31, 2014. The Company's capital position remains
substantially in excess of regulatory requirements for well capitalized status, with a total risk based capital ratio of 12.75% at December 31, 2015, as compared to 12.97% at
December 31, 2014. In addition, the tangible common equity ratio was 10.56% at December 31, 2015, compared to 8.54% at December 31, 2014.

Investment Securities Available-for-Sale and Short-Term Investments

The tables below and Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements provide additional information regarding the Company's
investment securities categorized as "available-for-sale" ("AFS"). The Company classifies all its investment securities as AFS. This classification requires that investment securities be recorded at
their fair value with any difference between the fair value and amortized cost (the purchase

price
adjusted by any discount accretion or premium amortization) reported as a component of shareholders' equity (accumulated other comprehensive income), net of deferred income taxes. At
December 31, 2015, the Company had a net unrealized gain in AFS securities of $1.7 million with a deferred income tax liability of $694 thousand, as compared to a net unrealized
gain in AFS securities of $4.4 million at December 31, 2014, with a deferred tax liability of $1.8 million, respectively.

The
AFS portfolio is comprised of U.S. agency securities (12% of AFS securities) with an average duration of 2.4 years, seasoned mortgage backed securities that are 100% agency
issued (61% of AFS securities) which have an average expected life of 3.7 years with contractual maturities of the underlying mortgages of up to thirty years, municipal bonds (24% of AFS
securities) which have an average duration of 5.2 years, corporate bonds (3% of AFS securities) which have an average duration of 3.8 years, and equity investments which comprise less
than 1% of AFS securities. The equity investment consists of common stock of a few community banking companies with an estimated fair value of $334 thousand. Ninety nine percent of the
investment securities which are debt instruments are rated AAA or AA or have the implicit guarantee of the U.S. Treasury.

At
December 31, 2015, the investment portfolio amounted to $487.9 million as compared to $382.3 million at December 31, 2014, an increase of 28%. The
investment portfolio is managed to achieve goals related to liquidity, income, interest rate risk management and to provide collateral for customer repurchase agreements and other borrowing
relationships.

The
following table provides information regarding the composition of the Company's investment securities portfolio at the dates indicated. Amounts are reported at estimated fair value.
The change in composition of the portfolio at December 31, 2015 as compared to 2014 was due principally to ALCO decisions to sell various longer-term municipal investments, to acquire floating
rate corporate bonds in June 2015, and to increase holdings of U.S. agency securities to well position the Company in the current interest rate environment. During the year ended December 31,
2015, the investment portfolio
balances increased as compared to balances at December 31, 2014, in part from the reinvestment of a portion of the cash flows from the sale of the indirect consumer loan portfolio which closed
in late July 2015, amounting to approximately $80.3 million at the time of sale. In addition to the purchase of investments, cash flows from the sale of the indirect consumer loan portfolio
provided additional liquidity for loan originations.

Years Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

(dollars in thousands)

Balance

Percent
of Total

Balance

Percent
of Total

Balance

Percent
of Total

U. S. agency securities

$

56,975

11.7

%

$

29,894

7.8

%

$

47,335

12.5

%

Residential mortgage backed securities

297,241

60.9

%

240,320

62.9

%

228,674

60.5

%

Municipal bonds

118,381

24.3

%

111,712

29.2

%

101,740

26.9

%

Corporate bonds

14,938

3.1

%









Other equity investments

334

0.1

%

417

0.1

%

384

0.1

%

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

$

487,869

100

%

$

382,343

100

%

$

378,133

100

%

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

At
December 31, 2015, there were no issuers, other than the U.S. Government and its agencies, whose securities owned by the Company had a book or fair value exceeding 10% of the
Company's shareholders' equity.

The
following table provides information, on an amortized cost basis, regarding the contractual maturity and weighted-average yield of the investment portfolio at December 31,
2015. Expected maturities will differ from contractual maturities because borrowers may have the right to call or prepay

obligations
with or without call or prepayment penalties. Yields on tax exempt securities have not been calculated on a tax equivalent basis.

One Year or Less

After One Year
Through Five Years

After Five Years
Through Ten Years

After Ten Years

Total

(dollars in thousands)

Amortized
Cost

Weighted
Average
Yield

Amortized
Cost

Weighted
Average
Yield

Amortized
Cost

Weighted
Average
Yield

Amortized
Cost

Weighted
Average
Yield

Amortized
Cost

Weighted
Average
Yield

U. S. agency securities

$

31,436

1.84

%

$

18,826

2.03

%

$

6,513

2.32

%

$





$

56,775

1.96

%

Residential mortgage backed securities

5,306

2.66

%

250,453

1.84

%

43,950

2.40

%





299,709

1.94

%

Muncipal bonds

4,450

2.84

%

41,214

3.47

%

66,001

2.23

%

2,588

4.01

%

114,253

2.74

%

Corporate bonds





15,090

1.03

%









15,090

1.03

%

Other equity investments

















307



​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

$

41,192

2.05

%

$

325,583

1.97

%

$

116,464

2.30

%

$

2,588

4.01

%

$

486,134

2.07

%

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

The
Company also has a portfolio of short-term investments utilized for asset liability management needs. For the year ended December 31, 2015, this portfolio totaled
$1.6 million and was comprised of time deposits. For the year ended December 31, 2014, this portfolio totaled $10.3 million and was comprised of discount notes, commercial paper,
money market investments, and other bank certificates of deposit.

Federal
funds sold amounted to $3.8 million at December 31, 2015 as compared to $3.5 million at December 31, 2014. These funds represent excess daily
liquidity which is invested on an unsecured basis with well capitalized banks, in amounts generally limited both in the aggregate and to any one bank.

Interest
bearing deposits with banks and other short-term investments amounted to $283.6 million at December 31, 2015 as compared to $243.4 million at
December 31, 2014. These overnight funds represent daily liquidity held at the Federal Reserve to meet future loan demand, to fund future increases in investment securities and to meet other
general liquidity needs of the Company.

Loan Portfolio

In its lending activities, the Company seeks to develop substantial relationships with clients whose businesses and individual banking
needs will grow with the Bank. There
has been a significant effort to grow the loan portfolio and to be responsive to the lending needs in the markets served by the Bank, while maintaining sound asset quality.

Loan
growth over the past year has been favorable, with loans outstanding reaching $5.00 billion at December 31, 2015, an increase of $686 million or 16% as compared
to $4.31 billion at December 31, 2014, and increased $2.05 billion or 70% as compared to $2.95 billion at December 31, 2013. Loan growth over the last twelve months
was due in part to the Bank's enhanced Northern Virginia footprint achieved through the Merger and the George Mason sponsorship, which presented additional opportunities to obtain and expand
relationships through attaining a much higher profile in this growing market within our trading area.

The
Company sold the indirect consumer loan portfolio acquired in the Merger, amounting to approximately $80.3 million as of the time of sale. The sale of this non-strategic loan
class allows the Company to deploy the funds into commercial and commercial real estate loans, its core competency, improve its yield on earning assets and reduce operating expenses. The estimated
loss of approximately $900 thousand has been included as an adjustment to the intangibles established in the Merger. The transaction closed on July 24, 2015.

Loan
growth in 2015 was predominantly in the income producingcommercial real estate and constructioncommercial and residential categories, along with
significant percentage increases in the commercial, owner occupiedcommercial real estate, and owner occupied commercial real estate

construction.
Despite an increased level of in-market competition for business, the Bank continued to experience strong organic loan growth across the portfolio, with the largest dollar increase in
the income producing property category. Multi-family commercial real estate leasing in the Bank's market area has held up well, particularly for well-located close-in projects, while suburban office
leasing softened somewhat. Overall, commercial real estate values have generally held up well with upward price escalation in prime pockets. The housing market has remained stable to increasing, with
well-located, Metro accessible properties garnering a premium.

Owner
occupied commercial real estate and owner occupied commercial real estate construction loans represent 12% of the loan portfolio. The Bank has a large portion of its loan portfolio
related to real estate, with 74% consisting of commercial real estate and real estate construction loans. When owner occupied commercial real estate and owner occupied commercial real estate
construction are excluded, the percentage of total loans represented by commercial real estate decreases to 62%. Real estate also serves as collateral for loans made for other purposes, resulting in
79% of loans being secured by real estate.

The
following table shows the trends in the composition of the loan portfolio over the past five years.

Years Ended December 31,

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

(dollars in thousands)

Amount

%

Amount

%

Amount

%

Amount

%

Amount

%

Commercial

$

1,052,257

21

%

$

916,226

21

%

$

694,350

24

%

$

545,070

22

%

$

478,886

23

%

Income producingcommercial real estate

2,115,478

42

%

1,703,172

40

%

1,119,800

38

%

914,638

37

%

756,645

37

%

Owner occupiedcommercial real estate

498,103

10

%

461,581

11

%

317,491

11

%

297,857

12

%

250,174

12

%

Real estate mortgageresidential

147,365

3

%

148,018

3

%

90,418

3

%

61,871

3

%

39,552

2

%

Constructioncommercial and residential

985,607

20

%

793,432

18

%

574,167

19

%

533,722

21

%

395,267

19

%

ConstructionC&I (owner occupied)

79,769

2

%

58,032

1

%

34,659

1

%

28,808

1

%

34,402

2

%

Home equity

112,885

2

%

122,536

3

%

110,242

4

%

106,844

4

%

97,103

5

%

Other consumer

6,904



109,402

3

%

4,031



4,285



4,227



​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Total loans

4,998,368

100

%

4,312,399

100

%

2,945,158

100

%

2,493,095

100

%

2,056,256

100

%

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Less: Allowance for credit losses

(52,687

)

(46,075

)

(40,921

)

(37,492

)

(29,653

)

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Net loans

$

4,945,681

$

4,266,324

$

2,904,237

$

2,455,603

$

2,026,603

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

As
noted above, a significant portion of the loan portfolio consists of commercial, construction and commercial real estate loans, primarily made in the Washington, D.C.
metropolitan area and secured by real estate or other collateral in that market. Although these loans are made to a diversified pool of unrelated borrowers across numerous businesses, adverse
developments in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan real estate market could have an adverse impact on this portfolio of loans and the Company's income and financial position. While our basic
market area is the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, the Bank has made loans outside that market area where the nature and quality of such loans was consistent with the Bank's lending
policies. At present, the Company believes that commercial real estate values are stable to improving in those sub-markets of the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area in which the Company has
significant real estate exposure.

The federal banking agencies have issued guidance for those institutions which are deemed to have concentrations in commercial real estate lending. Pursuant to
the supervisory criteria contained in the guidance for identifying institutions with a potential commercial real estate concentration risk, institutions which have (1) total reported loans for
construction, land development, and other land which represent in total 100% or more of an institution's total risk-based capital; or (2) total commercial real estate loans representing 300% or
more of the institutions total risk-based capital and the institution's commercial real estate loan portfolio has increased 50% or more during the prior 36 months are identified as having
potential commercial real estate concentration risk. Institutions which are deemed to have concentrations in commercial real estate lending are expected to employ heightened levels of risk management
with respect to their commercial real estate portfolios, and may be required to hold higher levels of capital. The Company, like many community banks, has a concentration in commercial real estate
loans, and the Company has experienced significant growth in its commercial real estate portfolio in recent years. Commercial real estate loans and construction, land and land development loans
represent 441% and 134%, respectively, of total risk based capital. Management has extensive experience in commercial real estate lending, and has implemented and
continues to maintain heightened portfolio monitoring and reporting, and strong underwriting criteria with respect to its commercial real estate portfolio. The Company is well capitalized.
Nevertheless, the Company could be required to maintain higher levels of capital as a result of our commercial real estate concentration, which could require us to obtain additional capital, and may
adversely affect shareholder returns.

At
December 31, 2015, the Company had no other concentrations of loans in any one industry exceeding 10% of its total loan portfolio. An industry for this purpose is defined as a
group of businesses that are engaged in similar activities and have similar economic characteristics that would cause their ability to meet contractual obligations to be similarly affected by changes
in economic or other conditions.

Loan Maturity

The following table sets forth the time to contractual maturity of the loan portfolio as of December 31, 2015.

Due In

(dollars in thousands)

Total

One Year or
Less

Over One to
Five Years

Over Five to
Ten Years

Over Ten
Years

Commercial

$

1,052,257

$

443,953

$

400,922

$

189,743

$

17,639

Income producingcommercial real estate

2,115,478

705,243

1,085,685

294,513

30,037

Owner occupiedcommercial real estate

498,103

43,398

172,045

226,290

56,370

Real estate mortgageresidential

147,365

7,075

116,111

1,474

22,705

Constructioncommercial and residential

985,607

416,477

523,526

40,228

5,376

ConstructionC&I (owner occupied)

79,769

4,229

9,879

56,342

9,319

Home equity

112,885

1,595

15,719

52,187

43,384

Other consumer

6,904

1,691

3,977

228

1,008

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Total loans

$

4,998,368

$

1,623,661

$

2,327,864

$

861,005

$

185,838

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Loans with:

Predetermined fixed interest rate

$

1,751,475

$

320,523

$

1,099,292

$

263,296

$

68,364

Floating interest rate

3,246,893

1,303,138

1,228,572

597,709

117,474

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Total loans

$

4,998,368

$

1,623,661

$

2,327,864

$

861,005

$

185,838

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Loans
are shown in the period based on final contractual maturity. Demand loans, having no contractual maturity and overdrafts, are reported as due in one year or less.

The provision for credit losses represents the amount of expense charged to current earnings to fund the allowance for credit losses.
The amount of the allowance for credit losses is based on many factors which reflect management's assessment of the risk in the loan portfolio. Those factors include economic conditions and trends,
the value and adequacy of collateral, volume and mix of the portfolio, performance of the portfolio, and internal loan processes of the Company and Bank.

Management
has developed a comprehensive analytical process to monitor the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses. This process and guidelines were developed utilizing, among other
factors,
the guidance from federal banking regulatory agencies. The results of this process, in combination with conclusions of the Bank's outside loan review consulting firm, support management's assessment
as to the adequacy of the allowance at December 31, 2015. During 2015, a provision for credit losses was made in the amount of $14.6 million and net charge-offs amounted to
$8.0 million. A full discussion of the accounting for allowance for credit losses is contained in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements and activity in the allowance for credit
losses is contained in Note 5 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Also, please refer to the discussion under the caption "Critical Accounting Policies" within Management's Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation for further discussion of the methodology which management employs to maintain an adequate allowance for credit losses, as well as the
discussion under the caption "Provision for Credit Losses."

The
allowance for credit losses represented 1.05% of total loans at December 31, 2015 as compared to 1.07% at December 31, 2014. At December 31, 2015, the allowance
represented 398% of nonperforming loans as compared to 205% at December 31, 2014. The decline in the ratio of the allowance for loan losses to total loans was due to improved credit quality in
the loan portfolio at December 31, 2015 versus December 31, 2014. The increase in the allowance coverage ratio was due in large part to the level of nonperforming loans declining by
$9.2 million, or approximately 41%, at December 31, 2015 as compared to December 31, 2014.

As
part of its comprehensive loan review process, the Bank's Board of Directors, Directors' Loan Committee or Credit Review Committee carefully evaluate loans which are past due
30 days or more. The Committees make a thorough assessment of the conditions and circumstances surrounding each delinquent loan. The Bank's loan policy requires that loans be placed on
nonaccrual if they are 90 days past due, unless they are well secured and in the process of collection. Additionally, Credit Administration specifically analyzes the status of development and
construction projects, sales activities and utilization of interest reserves in order to carefully and prudently assess potential increased levels of risk which may require additional reserves.

At
December 31, 2015, the Company had $13.2 million of loans classified as nonperforming, and $18.6 million of potential problem loans, as compared to
$22.4 million of nonperforming loans and $23.9 million of potential problem loans at December 31, 2014. Please refer to Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements
under the caption "Loans" for a discussion of the Company's policy regarding impairment of loans. Please refer to "Nonperforming Assets" at page 58 for a discussion of problem and potential
problem assets.

As
the loan portfolio and allowance for credit losses review processes continue to evolve, there may be changes to elements of the allowance and this may have an effect on the overall
level of the allowance maintained. Historically, the Bank has enjoyed a high quality loan portfolio with relatively low levels of net charge-offs and low delinquency rates. In 2015, the Company
witnessed an increased level of net charge-offs in dollars, but as a percentage of average loans the net charge-off ratio remained at 0.17%. The maintenance of a high quality portfolio will continue
to be a high priority for both management and the Board of Directors.

Management,
being aware of the significant loan growth experienced by the Company, is intent on maintaining a strong credit review function and risk rating process. The Company has an
experienced Credit Administration function, which provides independent analysis of credit requests and the management of problem credits. The Credit Department has developed and implemented analytical
procedures for evaluating credit requests, has refined the Company's risk rating system, and has adopted enhanced monitoring of the loan portfolio (in particular the construction loan portfolio) and
the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses, including stress test analyses. Additionally, fair value assessments of loans acquired is made as part of analytical procedures. The loan portfolio
analysis process is ongoing and proactive in order to maintain a portfolio of quality credits and to quickly identify any weaknesses before they become more severe.

The
following table sets forth activity in the allowance for credit losses for the past five years.

Years Ended December 31,

(dollars in thousands)

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

Balance at beginning of year

$

46,075

$

40,921

$

37,492

$

29,653

$

24,754

Charge-offs:

Commercial

4,693

2,634

4,275

3,481

4,310

Investmentcommercial real estate

651

121

602

1,189

277

Owner occupiedcommercial real estate



752



350



Real estate mortgageresidential



138



300

95

Constructioncommercial and residential

1,884

2,721

2,010

3,033

1,366

ConstructionC&I (owner occupied)











Home equity

1,142

379

89

698

295

Other consumer

228

189

63

47

87

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Total charge-offs

8,598

6,934

7,039

9,098

6,430

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Recoveries:

Commercial

195

977

161

144

28

Investmentcommercial real estate

26

42



18

126

Owner occupiedcommercial real estate

3

7







Real estate mortgageresidential

7







3

Constructioncommercial and residential

206

83

688

510

183

ConstructionC&I (owner occupied)











Home equity

25

10

11

73

3

Other consumer

110

90

6

2

3

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Total recoveries

572

1,209

866

747

346

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Net charge-offs

8,026

5,725

6,173

8,351

6,084

Provision for Credit Losses

14,638

10,879

9,602

16,190

10,983

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Balance at end of year

$

52,687

$

46,075

$

40,921

$

37,492

$

29,653

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Ratio of allowance for credit losses to total loans outstanding at year end

1.05

%

1.07

%

1.39

%

1.50

%

1.44

%

Ratio of net charge-offs during the year to average loans outstanding during the year

0.17

%

0.17

%

0.23

%

0.37

%

0.32

%

The
following table presents the allocation of the allowance for credit losses by loan category and the percent of loans each category bears to total loans. The allocation of the
allowance at December 31, 2015 includes specific reserves of $4.2 million against impaired loans of $25.1 million as compared to specific reserves of $8.1 million against
impaired loans of $35.9 million at December 31, 2014. The allocation of the